New York Times on the Web Forums Science

Missile Defense

Technology has always found its greatest consumer in a nation's war and defense efforts. Since the last attempts at a "Star Wars" defense system, has technology changed considerably enough to make the latest Missile Defense initiatives more successful? Can such an application of science be successful? Is a militarized space inevitable, necessary or impossible?

Read Debates, a new Web-only feature culled from Readers' Opinions, published every Thursday.

mazza9 - 01:47pm Dec 11, 2002 EST (# 6475 of 6477)
"Quae cum ita sunt" Caesar's Gallic Commentaries

Almarst:

As parents we try to prevent our children from making our mistakes in hope that their future will be "better". The denial of Scuds to Yemen is paternalistic, I'll admit. Can they be trusted, at this point in their history, to behave in a mature manner, (the US get's to define mature!). I don't think so.

The history of non-proliferation compliance is spotty at best but that's nothing new. The Washington Naval Conference of 1922 was designed to reduce the occurrence of future wars. That era's WMD, aka the battleship, was "limited" to many and denied to a few, (the "losers of WWI). Germany was one state that was not to have a Dreadnought!!! So they built the pocket battleship which met the letter of the law. They also built the Tirpitz and Bismarck and well... so much for "treaties to control human behavior" Kinda like North Korea's agreement with President Clinton to eschew a nuclear program which they failed to comply with!.

In today's world if we are to establish peace and tranquility then someone has to take on the parenting role. The UN has failed in this respect. It ignores the human rights violations that are occurring in Africa and yet finds Israel guilty of racism! The Iraq issue is a no brainer and yet a 17th resolution was needed to communicate to Iraq it's non compliance with the first 16 resolutions regarding their invasion of a soverign nation were not heeded to.

Time to spank the bad kids and establish peace and decorum in the world.

rshow55 - 01:48pm Dec 11, 2002 EST (# 6476 of 6477)
Can we do a better job of finding truth? YES. Click "rshow55" for some things Lchic and I have done and worked for on this thread.

almarst2002 12/11/02 1:43pm . . . conditions for a stable peace are falling into place - pretty fast.

Information handling is crucial - and a lot of progress is being made.

Now if there could be reasonable controls, if not at the level of controlling the "right to lie" -- at least at the level of a "right to checking" when stakes are high enough - - we could sort a lot of things out.

rshow55 - 01:54pm Dec 11, 2002 EST (# 6477 of 6477)
Can we do a better job of finding truth? YES. Click "rshow55" for some things Lchic and I have done and worked for on this thread.

The UN may be in the process of succeeding.

The position set out in mazza9 12/11/02 1:47pm can't last - but may have its uses, in forcing the nations in the world to make international law work.

There are plenty of circumstances in the world where "there has to be a fight."

Most of the time, most of the fighting can be done - well by almost all reasonable standards - at the level of ideas - if checking facts is done with enough effort - and things are taken to closure.

For instance, if radical islam decides to define itself as in a "fight to the death" with modernity - once that is clear - the situation can be resolved - and will be - and the body counts can be quite low.

Modernity has too much to offer, and radical islam has too little, for there to be any chance for radical islam to win, if it is defined in such terms.

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense