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 MessagesPrevious MessagesOutline (8299 previous messages)

rshow55 - 09:48am Jan 29, 2003 EST (#8300 of 8313) 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.

Can Iraq, or any other Islamic nation, do exactly what the Bush administration hopes - in exactly the way that is being asked?

There are religous aspects to the question, but some even more basic ones, as well.

People are afraid - more afraid than they like to admit - and whenever they are being asked to do things very different from the things they are used to doing - whenever they are asked to depart from the social usages that they expect, and others expect of them - people are afraid for good reasons.

Are we asking Iraqis to do things that, as human beings, they can reasonably be asked to do?

If people recognized those reasons more clearly - a great deal might be sorted out. Could it be that Iraq, within its limits - is trying hard to accomodate the UN? There certainly is evidence on that side.

I certainly agree that "regime change" is going to be necessary in Iraq. But the question of what reasonable changes may be seems open, still - not just to me, but to other people.

Could we find ways to meet our needs that dealt with their limitations as well? Is war the best answer to that question?

If it is, it would have to be a war fought with more understanding than the Bush administration seems to be showing, it seems to me.

Cooper, I like the idea of going to Chicago - and I'm thinking maybe we could meet Saturday. Perhaps in a museum, or some other well lighted place, to start with. But I do have some concerns. Whether you happen to like them or not. I'll be writing you by the end of the day - - I will say this - I'll only go down to Chicago if I have your phone number - and both my wife and I have talked to you over the phone. I have a number of things I have to think about. One is, what you are trying to prove?

rshow55 - 09:58am Jan 29, 2003 EST (#8301 of 8313) 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.

Just got a promotional phone call - with a number I would have liked to write down - but didn't get.

Maybe that happened at random - but the voice stress was high on the call - and the deal sounded very interesting. I was too distracted to get the number.

When that sort of thing happens - you can only guess what it means - and the likelihood is that the guess can be wrong.

A problem is that, when everybody's scared - more-or-less random things like that can lead to big understandings. If I get other promotional calls today - I'll try to have a pencil ready.

lchic - 10:04am Jan 29, 2003 EST (#8302 of 8313)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

"" George Bush accused Saddam Hussein of "utter contempt" for the United Nations last night, saying the Iraqi leader was systematically deceiving the international community.

In some of his most uncompromising language yet, designed to prepare his country for war, President Bush said Saddam had ignored his "final chance to disarm" as laid down by UN resolution 1441.

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/politics/story.jsp?story=373667

rshow55 - 10:17am Jan 29, 2003 EST (#8303 of 8313) 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.

Maybe Saddam is actually doing the best he can - and would do better (as would his subordinates) if they actually knew how.

The UN might consider this in detail - and maybe talk to the Iraqis about just this. Some contempt, going both ways, is to be expected. But the Iraqis have shown some good faith, as well.

More MessagesRecent MessagesOutline (10 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  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