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.

manjumicha - 09:51pm Jan 5, 2003 EST (# 7388 of 7409)

Notice again Section II of the agreement!!!

II. The two sides will move toward full normalization of political and economic relations.

l) Within three months of the date of this document, both sides will reduce barriers to trade and investment, including restrictions on telecommunications services and financial transactions.

WHAT??? WITHIN THREE MONTHS !!, Now has any US media professional ever mentioned this clause during the last 8 years when discussing the alleged breach of the agreement by NK? Don't think so.

gisterme - 09:56pm Jan 5, 2003 EST (# 7389 of 7409)

manjumicha 1/5/03 9:43pm

"...I am sorry to pop your pseduo left-right bubbles..."

The 1994 agreement wasn't for NK to disarm. It was to freeze plutonium production and development of nuclear bombs. The bomb that NK claims certainly hasn't been developed since last December.

If NK were not receiving the oil, food and nuclear technology promised by the US don't you think they would have been raising a big stink about it? Of course they would have.

The NKs got caught with their hand in the cookie jar and are now making a stink because their economy can't provide even basic necessities for their people without US or other outside aid. I wonder if Kim Jong Il was thinking his people could eat nukes if he got caught?

As for the "Axis of Evil" designation? Well, sounds like the president was privvy to some information that you and I weren't. Can you imagine that? I'll also guarantee you that the NKs haven't developed their nuclear bomb since that speech.

So could it be that NK's violation of it's agreement with the US is the reason for the current membership in the A of E? I'll bet it is.

Nothing else fits the timeline.

And don't be sorry for me, manju. My bubbles are fine. :-)

almarst2002 - 10:07pm Jan 5, 2003 EST (# 7390 of 7409)

manjumicha 1/5/03 9:51pm

Thank you very much for the info.

The more I learn on how this "champion of the freedom and democracy" operates abroad and covers its acts using soooo agreedable media and congress at home, the more disgasting it looks to me.

I don't think Robert would like to wake up one morning having such a "policeman" on his block. No wonder - the rest of the World does not. But it seems more and more likely to happen.

Call it a New Rome or a New Reich, or "A shiny city on the hill" if you like.

almarst2002 - 10:15pm Jan 5, 2003 EST (# 7391 of 7409)

"sounds like the president was privvy to some information that you and I weren't. Can you imagine that?"

Wery likely so. But what is the reason to call someone a name without explaining the reason?

Secondly, Why should we trust this president more then any other? Wasn't this type of the Government designed exactly to put a check on any power, including the president's?

Way too much what is done in the name of US abroad just flies stright into face of its proclaimed principles, values and even formal laws. That's THE SAD FACT.

gisterme - 10:22pm Jan 5, 2003 EST (# 7392 of 7409)

l) Within three months of the date of this document, both sides will reduce barriers to trade and investment, including restrictions on telecommunications services and financial transactions..."

"...Now has any US media professional ever mentioned this clause during the last 8 years when discussing the alleged breach of the agreement by NK?..."

Why should they have? The US kept it's part of that bargain. If I'm not mistaken, it was the NK government that was reluctant to let the lowering of barriers be bilateral.

You see, it's hard for the NKs to maintan their little iron curtain around their country, to keep their people in the dark, when telecom systems, internet and so forth are installed. By their nature, those systems let information go both ways. So far as "barriers to investment" are concerned, well, just because the barriers are taken away that doesn't mean anybody would want to invest in NK. Investors want a return on their investment. Were I one of those, I wouldn't consider NK a very good bet.

I'm sure neither of us have any way to prove that one way or the other without doing some reasearch. Since you're making the accusation, manju, why not present some evidence that what you're saying is true?

I notice that almarst, as usual, is willing to find the US guilty on your say-so with no other information being presented. Almarst is almarst; but, I doubt that anybody else will accept such flimsy evidence of your claim.

(17 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense