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.

gisterme - 03:22am Jan 5, 2003 EST (# 7340 of 7348)

gisterme 1/5/03 3:20am (continued)

The question was:

"What would happen, if the people playing this "game that is not a game" set out honestly and in public what they actually wanted - in such detail that it could actually work in the (relatively few) interfaces between the "players" that have to exist for peace, prosperity, and comfort?"

Firstly, murderers and liars like those listed above will never set out honestly and in public what they want. As a matter of fact they must hide those dots we've been talking about to succeed in thier schemes.

For example, did Hitler, following his (to him) orderly, symmetric, harmonious and aesthetically beautiful vision of an aryan nation ever publically say that his intent was to slaughter everybody that didn't quite fit into his picture? Of course he didn't. Why not? The answer to that is just exactly what I was talking about the other day. The truth about the difference between projected perception and reality must remain hidden until absolute power is achieved. Herr Hitler knew that, and his personal acievement of absolute power was an integral part of his (to him) orderly, symmetric, harmonious and aesthetically beautiful vision. Therefore he could not publicly reveal the whole truth about what he wanted without destroying his vision. Intrestingly, he did reveal just enough of the truth about what he wanted to satisfy Neville Chamberlian.

So to answer the question by example, what would have happened in Hitler's case is that he would never have become Chancelor of Germany and the Third Reich would never have come to pass. But it did.

The same idea applies to the rest on the list above and others throughout history. The reason such men rise to power is because they are inherently dishonest.

Now, your question presumes honesty and good will are simply a choice to be made by the well-meaning...and they are a choice for the well-meaning. However, since the folks who cause the problems are neither honest nor well-meaning, they must lie...they must maintain that false perception before their public...they must hide the dots until their position of power is unassailable.

Secondly, when we're discussing the "relatively few" interfaces we're obviously neglecting the interfaces between intrinsically evil persons like those listed above and their victims. There are tens of millions of those. That doesn't seem like reltaively few to me. It does seem like a gross oversimplification that when coupled with the naive assumption of good intentions reveals a huge flaw in the order, symmetry and harmony of the fundamental basis of the question.

If everyone were always honest and well-meaning in their dealings with others then there would be no need to ask the question.

No wonder you got a headache, Robert. Don't feel bad though. That question would have given a headache to any well-meaning person who failed to notice that there really is evil in the world.

Perhaps, someday, somehow, evil will be driven out of this world. That would definately reduce the frequency of headaches and heartaches.

lunarchick - 03:54am Jan 5, 2003 EST (# 7341 of 7348)

Gisterme almost has us believing that:

Showalter is out and about on his tandem with a giant butterfly net in the one hand, topographically selecting and collecting dots.

In his bike basket Showalter will of course be carrying The Golden Rule, Maslow's Heiracarchy, and Berle's Law of Power.]

To make it curioser and curioser he tosses in ample shredded complexity and stirs.

Next they're skimm-skammed by the brain, then marinated for a few hours ...

... later ... heypresto NEW perspectives can be pulled from the mix by any passing white rabbit - even one in a hurry!

Showalter's sure to say that even small creatures want to do the very best they can ... because 'it matters'.

:)

lunarchick - 03:58am Jan 5, 2003 EST (# 7342 of 7348)

!

lunarchick - 04:05am Jan 5, 2003 EST (# 7343 of 7348)

Quote ...when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.
Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (Sherlock Holmes)

lunarchick - 04:15am Jan 5, 2003 EST (# 7344 of 7348)

Showalter would recommend to 'keep checking' ....

on doing so perhaps i got the signs exactly wrong in the first paragraph here to Gisterme's utter amusment, no doubt :)

(4 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense