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.

rshow55 - 09:11am Jan 8, 2003 EST (# 7477 of 7479)
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.

We have to worry about mutations - and the Bush administration is spreading mutagens around the world, some of them big ones - and doing it very fast.

Indirectness and directness both have their uses. Short, sharp logical relatinships have their uses - and so do ornate, cumbersome ones.

Which do people use, most of the time - and how well does it work? For what?

A lot of things - when you count - most things - that people do already - that they've been doing them for a long time - are well done at most levels that matter most of the time - though resorts can be a godsend when they're done right.

Radical changes, especially if they are to happen under time pressure - have to be very carefully done. George Bush is no conservative. He is a radical irresponsible radical irresponsible ignorant cocksure very smart very priviledge character who needs to be careful - needs to be careful - and doesn't deserve remotely as much trust as he believes he does.

I think George Bush is in danger of being very irresponsible, and very negligent - and there are times when - if I'm slow and indirect - I'm doing it for reasons that gisterme and other people ought to listen to.

If people take their time, are clear, and careful - a lot of things could go beautifully. Beautifully. From many points of view - but things are moving too fast, and are often "too simple" in some crucial spots and people have to be careful.

People with influence at the United Nations, and elsewhere, should insist on it - even if they have to be impolite about it.

Things could work well if we're careful. Or be a mess that might not sort out well again, ever.

rshow55 - 09:41am Jan 8, 2003 EST (# 7478 of 7479)
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.

The posting above has errors - I felt under logical pressure - there was a lot on my mind - and to be careful about some things - you lose sight of others. That's true for everybody -- for every animal - - at every level - for basic reasons - and "you can't win"

You're damned if you do, and damned if you don't.

Except you're not - some sorts are very much better than others - some compromises are very much better than others - some vitally important things are being sorted out - some of them very well.

The key rule - every which way - in space - in time - in logical sequences - in historical context - in application or evaluation of weights - is

order
symmetry
harmony.

At the most primal levels (which need to be explicitly understood) - in that order - though at higher levels, for special purposes, those orders may mutate for short, exceptional times.

You can neglect sorting, prioritizing for order, symmetry and harmony in specific context and at system levels for a while - and sometimes have to. But if things get complicated enough - at some levels you have to get them sorted - or abortions occur too often - horrors happen too often - and too many systems and people and assemblies and assemblies of people die in too many ugly and avoidable ways.

You can't get order, symmetry, and harmony in every respect. One specific sort rules out another specific sort. Different people are different - and so are different systems. This board is working very well, for the most important purposes I've had in mind - world survival and sorting out lethals - I'm really pleased - and some other people have to be giving it high grades, too. It is good, in significant ways, when it is slow and fragemented. And when it is fast - as it sometimes is.

(1 following message)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense