New York Times Readers Opinions
The New York Times

Home
Job Market
Real Estate
Automobiles
News
International
National
Washington
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
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 (8023 previous messages)

rshow55 - 08:47am Jan 25, 2003 EST (# 8024 of 8040) 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.

Gisterme , I didn't miss your last postings - but I'm hesitating to get into a fight with someone who either is, or is close to, the President of the United States. When I do it, I want to serve the interests of the United States, as Bill Casey would expect me to do - and want to strengthen the president, and the US, when it is right. And correcting him and his associates in ways that they can use - and ought, after a little time, to appreciate.

Some serious mistakes are being made - millions of lives may be blighted, and very many lost, unless we sort some things out that we can sort out now.

U.S. May Not Press U.N. for a Decision on Iraq Next Week By ELISABETH BUMILLER and STEVEN R. WEISMAN http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/25/international/middleeast/25IRAQ.html is an important piece - and represents decisions on the part of the US that could be very constructive. It was the lead piece in the Wisconsin State Journal, as well as the NYT this morning. It is worth reading many times, as people think about what it means to "collect the dots" to "connect the dots" - and to persuade in the way that is needed most fundamentally - by saying "here, look for YOURSELF."

I'm being careful - and I do not have to hurry to rough up either myself, or gisterme - when with a little more care - constructive things can be done.

Gisterme might learn some useful things about oscillatory solutions - and how they depend on order , symmetry , and harmony for a particular purpose. So that with proper sorting - "rough" components can do precise jobs. It is also useful to know how a digital volt meter is analog - and how it is digital.

Also, it is a fact that the good experimentalists I know, when they look at digital meters on measurements and setups they care about - pay a lot of attention to the fluctuatios of the last digit(s) - for very good reasons.

I'm hopeful. Keller and Eakin did wonderfully in the paper today - and I wish Casey and Steve Kline were alive to see things now. I think they'd be both hopeful and proud.

I'm trying to help the Bush administration keep the promises it cares most about - and do so in ways that further the interests of the United States - and other people as well.

rshow55 - 09:41am Jan 25, 2003 EST (# 8025 of 8040) 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.

Christianity and Islam are quite different religions, with different priorities.

To come to workable accomodations - key facts have to be understood -whether we happen to like them, or not. And we have to respect the feelings of people whose feelings and cultures are different from our own.

There are many differences between Christians, and the Christian tradition has changed a great deal over time. But for Christians, the Sermon on the Mount is fundamental - and when reasoning gets down to basics, the question of consistency to the Golden Rule is a bedrock theme - and an important test of Christian propriety.

There are differences between followers of Islam, as well, and Islamic religious and cultural patterns have changed a great deal over time. Followers of Islam acknowledge the importance of Jesus as a profit - but the central concerns of Islam are different from the concerns Jesus adressed. For followers of Islam, the sexual rules and relations of a proper Islamic marriage - where women are subordinated to husbands, and men subordinated to Allah, are fundamental - probably as central to Islamic doctrine as the Golden Rule is to Christian doctrine. When reasoning gets down to basics, questions of consistency to the Islamic marriage rules are a bedrock theme of Islam - the question what does a man need to boff his wife or wives in the religiously and culturally expected way? is fundamental - and is discussed and thought about again and again and is a vital test of Islamic propriety.

More Messages Recent Messages (15 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Email to Sysop  Your Preferences  Logout

 [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