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.

bbbuck - 11:24pm Dec 15, 2002 EST (# 6703 of 6716)
"You can't eat this, it's people, it's people"-B....."What about the cherry pie?"

Anyone showing the slightest hint of disagreement with Stalin or his platform was executed or sent to the gulag. Arbitrarily sending people to siberia snuffed out any preferences of the people. Their civil liberties removed they had no preferences left. Work and keep your mouth shut or die. What preference are you talking about?

fredmoore - 11:26pm Dec 15, 2002 EST (# 6704 of 6716)

Correction .....

fredmoore 12/15/02 9:59pm

Entropy Deficiency Syndrome should read ..... Entropy Surplus Syndrome (ESS). Entropy being a measure of chaos or disorder.

I also omitted to point out that CHINA is the best nation to take charge of the Thermoelectric Fabric research project as that country appears to have the highest concentrations of REE's (Rare Earth Elements) in its soils. REE's are the key to any thermoelectric material due to the large range of subtle d and f orbital electron arrangements

Gisterme ...

'I think that life itself is the "anti-entropy" feature of the physical universe.'

You are right of course ... but life evolves ... usually in rapid bursts which create wakes of turbulence. What most of us are saying is that we are fed up with the ugly consequences of that turbulence.

A few simple energy development and conservation programs, on a global scale, that do not interfere too much with national sovereignty or national fiscal goals ought to streamline our immediate progress. Surely this will be well received by world leaders. The only thing missing is a little scientific understanding in the minds of the world's current leaders.

almarst2002 - 11:28pm Dec 15, 2002 EST (# 6705 of 6716)

gisterme 12/15/02 11:23pm

I am glad you understand enough of what I (mis)type to disagree with me. That's sufficient from my own perspective. Even you may disagree again;)

BTW. You didn't answer my prior direct question to you.

almarst2002 - 11:31pm Dec 15, 2002 EST (# 6706 of 6716)

bbbuck 12/15/02 11:24pm

The subtle things called national pride and patriotism. The nation remains nation even under the tyrany of its ruler. And only the nation can decide when and how to change it.

almarst2002 - 11:33pm Dec 15, 2002 EST (# 6707 of 6716)

bbbuck 12/15/02 11:24pm

I wonder just how much do you really know and understand the lives of Russian people at that time?

gisterme - 11:40pm Dec 15, 2002 EST (# 6708 of 6716)

almarst2002 12/15/02 11:18pm

"...One thing is clear, most nations prefere their own tyrans over those placed by the foreigners..."

That's another thing we concur on, almarst! My gosh! We may be about to set a record here! Twice in two posts! What do you suppose the odds would be for a hat trick?

That's the lesson learned in WWII by the western nations. That's why Germany and Japan, two utterly defeated nations, do not have tyrants today. Only those nations occupied by the USSR after 1945 started out with tyrants. As the Cold War progressed and Soviet expansionism attempted to foment "revolutions" so they could install their tyrants in other places, it would seem that the West adapted a policy of installing "sterile" tyrants in those places before the "revolutions" could reach maturity. That was apparantly a component of the western policy of containment. I've noticed that since the end of the Cold War, all the Soviet sponsered tyrants have pretty much gone away except for a few hangers on like those in Iraq, NK and Cuba. None of the regimes of "sterile" tyrants that came from the west are still in office as far as I know. They're all gone. So is the regime of Soviet expnasionism.

Who would disagree that the world is a better place without the whole bloody lot?

(8 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense