New York Times Readers Opinions
The New York Times
Home
Job Market
Real Estate
Automobiles
News
International
National
Washington
Campaigns
Business
Technology
Science
Health
Sports
New York Region
Education
Weather
Obituaries
NYT Front Page
Corrections
Opinion
Editorials/Op-Ed
Readers' Opinions


Features
Arts
Books
Movies
Travel
Dining & Wine
Home & Garden
Fashion & Style
New York Today
Crossword/Games
Cartoons
Magazine
Week in Review
Multimedia
College
Learning Network
Services
Archive
Classifieds
Book a Trip
Personals
Theater Tickets
Premium Products
NYT Store
NYT Mobile
E-Cards & More
About NYTDigital
Jobs at NYTDigital
Online Media Kit
Our Advertisers
Member_Center
Your Profile
E-Mail Preferences
News Tracker
Premium Account
Site Help
Privacy Policy
Newspaper
Home Delivery
Customer Service
Electronic Edition
Media Kit
Community Affairs
Text Version
TipsGo to Advanced Search
Search Options divide
go to Member Center Log Out
  

 [F] 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.


Earliest Messages Previous Messages Recent Messages Outline (7225 previous messages)

mazza9 - 02:52pm Jan 2, 2003 EST (# 7226 of 7232)
"Quae cum ita sunt" Caesar's Gallic Commentaries

Robert:

I was referring to the "agreement" between North Korea, Japan, and the United States regarding the North Korean nuclear weapons program. The North Korean government did not abide by the agreement and now state that they will not adhere to the Non-Proliferation treaty to which they are signatories. Oh wow! Now they are goin' to ship those Scuds to whomever with the warhead attached. Just what we need in Yemen, Iraq, Syria, and wherever the force of arms is the preferred negotiating tool!

As for Iraq, let's have a reality check. In Aug of 1990 Iraq and Kuwait were members of the United Nations. When Iraq invaded Kuwait they violated the UN charter! Security Council warnings were issued, a coalition whas formed and Iraq, when it wouldn't withdraw peacefully, was ejected by combined UN force. Iraq surrendered! As such it has very few, if any rights, except for the right to be defeated and shut up. Yet, throughout the inspection regime until 1998, as evidence of WMD were continually unearthed, all the Iraqi's could say was that "their sovereignty, was being violated. Guess what, under International Law the rights of the defeated enemy are few and far between. Now after a 4 year hiatus the inspection regime continues with murmurs of the use of WMD against invading forces, those WMDs having been denied by the Iraq government! They want to have it both ways!

I agree with Lunarchick. Saddam's son learned well at his father's knee. The sadistic b@st@rd should be brought to justice for his many violations of human rights!

If the "leaders" of Pyongyang and Baghdad could be whisked away to the planet Pluto the populations of those countries would have a better, fullfilling life under a benevolent rule as UN mandates until they can form a democratic government of their choosing!

manjumicha - 04:23pm Jan 2, 2003 EST (# 7227 of 7232)

mazza......marches on like an energizer bunny.......bravely into 2003....chanting and scaring the "cheaters" of this world......the modern minuteman, a citizen soldier, the defender of feedom and honor.....ie a real world "superman".....

almarst2002 - 04:44pm Jan 2, 2003 EST (# 7228 of 7232)

A MUST to read - Institute for Public Accuracy - http://www.accuracy.org/new.htm

CHALMERS JOHNSON, chaljohnson@mindspring.com, www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Sept_11_2001/Blowback_CJ_article.html Author of Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire and Okinawa: Cold War Island, Johnson is a specialist on the politics and economics of East Asia and a veteran of the Korean War. He said today: "Bush came into office saying that he did not want to negotiate with North Korea. Even under Clinton, the U.S. was failing to fulfill its agreements with the North Koreans. The U.S. has essentially caused the current crisis with its belligerent stance toward North Korea, including its rebuff of South Korean President Kim's peace initiative (for which he won the 2000 Nobel Peace Prize), the 'axis of evil' speech, the new National Security Strategy Directive of September 2002 endorsing 'preventive' war by the U.S., and the policy advocating the use of nuclear weapons in the interests of maintaining American hegemony. South Korea is a genuine democracy, created in 1987 when Koreans revolted against 25 years of American-supported military dictators. The U.S. still has more than 100 military bases in South Korea.... How would we feel if it were reversed? ... Another source of resentment is the South Korean economic meltdown a few years ago, which was essentially caused by the IMF, largely controlled by the U.S. government. South Korea has recovered brilliantly but it still resents American interference and arrogance...."

almarst2002 - 04:50pm Jan 2, 2003 EST (# 7229 of 7232)

A MUST to read - Institute for Public Accuracy - http://www.accuracy.org/war-releases.htm

stephen20020 - 04:55pm Jan 2, 2003 EST (# 7230 of 7232)

You can email the President, VP, 1st Lady, Speaker of the House, Senate Majority Leader & Rush Limbaugh from my homepage. Check it out, there's something for everyone. The address is http://www.geocities.com/capitolhill/8889

More Messages Recent Messages (2 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

 [F] New York Times on the Web Forums  / Science  / Missile Defense





Home | Back to Readers' Opinions Back to Top


Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company | Privacy Policy | Contact Us