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.

almarst2002 - 11:41pm Dec 15, 2002 EST (# 6709 of 6716)

John R. Bolton, the undersecretary of state for arms control and international security affairs, represents the right wing of the foreign policy establishment. How right? In January 2001, Jesse Helms endorsed Bolton: "John Bolton is the kind of man with whom I would want to stand at Armageddon, if it should be my lot to be on hand for what is forecast to be the final battle between good and evil in this world." - http://www.fpif.org/republicanrule/officials_body.html#bolton

almarst2002 - 11:49pm Dec 15, 2002 EST (# 6710 of 6716)

gisterme 12/15/02 11:40pm "Who would disagree that the world is a better place without the whole bloody lot?"

Not me.

But what about my prior question to you?

Who is going to decide on foreign intervention aganst a nation?

Would the US cary the same policy if it would be 1/10 of its size or power?

bbbuck - 12:07am Dec 16, 2002 EST (# 6711 of 6716)
"You can't eat this, it's people, it's people"-B....."What about the cherry pie?"

Indeed what can any of us know of history of a by-gone generation in a far off land.
I can read and try to comprehend.
2500 pages of Aleksandr I Solzhenitsyn, 600 pages of Robert K. Massie, "Nicholas and Alexandra", etc. does not make me an expert.
But it's an attempt.

gisterme - 12:15am Dec 16, 2002 EST (# 6712 of 6716)

almarst2002 12/15/02 11:15pm

"...Do you believe any foreign government has the right to interfere in other nations internal affairs it deems in need to be improved?..."

I think that sort of interference should only be expected in a world where tyranny, forced suffering, abject cruelty, denail of civil liberties and denial of basic human rights are not tolerated, almarst. Only in a situation where the leadership dictating the internal affairs of the nation in question represent all those things and a threat to other nations would I expect that sort of interference in "internal affairs".

In a situation where such interference would end tyranny, forced suffereing and abject cruelty, restore basic human rights and civil liberties while eliminating the threat to others... i.e. in a civilized world...I would hope such interference would take place as a humanitarian act.

The conditions of human deprival and external threat are the conditions where "internal affairs" of a political government are elevated to the level of "human affairs" of the civilized world and, I'm beginning to realize, that's a level that transcends the rights of evil tyrants.

Is that the question I didn't answer before?

gisterme - 12:25am Dec 16, 2002 EST (# 6713 of 6716)

almarst2002 12/15/02 11:49pm

"...Would the US cary the same policy if it would be 1/10 of its size or power?..."

I would hope so, almarst, as a moral issue. The UK does so and they're probably not even at 1/10 the size and power of the US.

lunarchick - 01:26am Dec 16, 2002 EST (# 6714 of 6716)

Judge leaders against themselves

Personal strengths weaknesses set against personal liberty, democracy and Risks - national and international.

Set-up a key list

checkmark it

How do leaders rate?

What do people under leaderships 'think' of the leader?

There are good, bad, indifferent leaders ... there are also tyrants and monsters ... who need to be checked!

lunarchick - 01:33am Dec 16, 2002 EST (# 6715 of 6716)

Democracy - for Iraq .... (stated above) got picked on wrt a need for LIBERTY ...

Liberty http://www.pbs.org/ktca/liberty/

Liberty-Democracy papers

(1 following message)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense