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 - 02:12pm Dec 11, 2002 EST (# 6479 of 6482)
"Quae cum ita sunt" Caesar's Gallic Commentaries

"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.

Robert, Your idealism is showing and I can't say that I disagree. Peace on Earth will come about when we address all the needs of the entire world peacefully.

The other evening, there was a movie on AMC that was made in 1939. It starred Clark Gable and Norma Shearer and was titled, "Idiot's Delight". The premise, pure and simple was that war is idiotic. The moral holds true today. Palestinian gunmen killing an Israeli baby is not the honorable way to convince Israel that a just settlement can be negotiated. Firing missiles at civilian airliners and destroying a tourist hotel is not the kind of combat that is acceptable under international law. A friend who flew F-105s over Hanoi in 1968 told me that one of the strange aspects of war conduct was when he went on an R&R trip to Hong Kong. He took a commercial flight from Bangkok to Hong Kong and flew directly over Hanoi. Strange it may seem he looked out the window and marveled at how peaceful operations were maintained over a hostility zone! Today's terrorists recognize no chivalry, no proper behaviors. they are bullies and demand, "Do it my way or die." Well, I'm ready to see them die. No mercy for the mercliess!

rshow55 - 02:27pm Dec 11, 2002 EST (# 6480 of 6482)
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.

mazza9 12/11/02 2:12pm

It is easy for enemies to "agree" that they're happy to let each other die.

Usually, because of consequences, there are good reasons to look for other ways.

The fight with the terrorists involves ideas - - and we have to deal with those ideas, whatever the carnage may happen to be.

If we deal with the ideas, the agony and death may amount to much less than it otherwise would.

I'm no pacifist, Mazza, and you should know it.

If people were clear about what they were fighting about - really clear - some fights might get sharper - but generally those fights would be well contained.

Most fights would be avoidable.

rshow55 - 02:29pm Dec 11, 2002 EST (# 6481 of 6482)
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 2:04pm . . . I agree very much - - and wish the points involved could be shown more clearly, more persuasively - and understood more widely.

If leaders wanted that to happen - - it would.

That would be consistent with any decent United States national interest, in my opinion.

(1 following message)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense