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 (7422 previous messages)

rshow55 - 03:42pm Jan 6, 2003 EST (# 7423 of 7452) Delete Message
Can we do a better job of finding truth? YES. Click "rshow55" for some things Lchic and I have done and worked for on this thread.

I've finished a stage of checking and calculation - or believe that I have - and things seem very good. I feel quite sure that the answers to the questions posed in 7379 rshow55 1/5/03 6:01pm are all yes, and the answer to the more general, related questions are also yes. Here are the specific questions:

Could the situation in North Korea be resolved, from where we are, step by step, practically - in a way in the interests of all concerned - without war? And if so, how could it be done?

Could the situation in Iraq be resolved, from where we are, step by step, practically - in a way in the interests of all concerned - without war? And if so, how could it be done?

Generating agreements for checking has to happen in a sequence of steps - and if people are clear about what the agreement has to do - the needed agreements are constructable - if checking happens when it logically has to, during construction, and from time to time during use.

Every way I can see, any workable agreement of the sort needed would take a reliable checking team, to handle certain complications.

I have an idea, that I haven't checked nearly so much, about how to show that checking - at the level of logical structure - so that it could be done by others, for the particular agreements that would have to be negotiated and set up for stable, reliable, comfortable function.

A key point is that, to check anything - you actually have to nail it down, somehow or other, and check it.

At the level of logical structure, I believe that I could show exactly how to check everything that would need to be checked - for any specific agreement - over the telephone - and with some record keeping on the internet - by demonstrating the checking for a prototype case where I had lunarchick's help - and the help of another person, with status and a name, who is female (A NYT Science reporter would be ideal) or two people, with status and names, who are male (two NYT Science reporters would be ideal.)

Maybe nobody but me worries about checking. I worry about it a lot.

I think I could also communicate the key information if a request I made on a postcard some a while ago could be granted, or if I could at least discuss the request face to face with the person the postcard adressed in a way that I could report.

I've made promises I haven't kept, and I've got to attend to some of them, and rest some - but things look very hopeful to me.

There are some promises that the United States has got to be prepared to make, and keep - and if it breaks them - it has to be prepared to make amends.

That applies to some other players, too. Doesn't look so hard to me. Maybe I've blown something. I can't check myself, in some key ways. How on earth could I possibly do so?

bbbuck - 04:30pm Jan 6, 2003 EST (# 7424 of 7452)
"You can't eat this, it's people, it's people"-B....."What about the cherry pie?"

I've been looking to check some things and in looking at dots and connections and symmetricallities it seems some askew variables have surfaced which have made me skeptical of what I have checked and what seems uncheckable.
I believe I have some things in my closet that make me worry about my checking method, I better go check to see that they are still there.
I also must admit, I worry about the state of our checked and unchecked assets.
Let's all go into a room and worry about it. We can check each other once we're in there.

lunarchick - 05:23pm Jan 6, 2003 EST (# 7425 of 7452)

Check for what - body lice?

lunarchick - 05:27pm Jan 6, 2003 EST (# 7426 of 7452)

removal of an itch

lunarchick - 05:30pm Jan 6, 2003 EST (# 7427 of 7452)

The downside of war

lunarchick - 05:34pm Jan 6, 2003 EST (# 7428 of 7452)

Peace resolution

Decision by a national assembly to seek a peace by negotiation to end hostilities.

More Messages Recent Messages (24 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 2003 The New York Times Company | Privacy Policy | Contact Us