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 (8543 previous messages)

lchic - 07:51am Feb 3, 2003 EST (# 8544 of 8548)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

NASA Dismissed Advisers Who Warned About Safety By WILLIAM J. BROAD and CARL HULSE

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/03/national/03NASA.html Some former members of an expert NASA panel now say that the agency removed them to suppress their safety warnings.

lchic - 08:06am Feb 3, 2003 EST (# 8545 of 8548)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Moving back using the search function it seems that kalter.rauch who complains re his 'having to read MD posts' on a catch-up basis - now posts exclusively on MD.

So why would he?

Why would a presumably grown man with free will just post on this one board - and lament the fact.

One would have to ask -- is he 'paid in like or kind' to monitor the board?

lchic - 08:32am Feb 3, 2003 EST (# 8546 of 8548)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Correction here - he's not exclusive to MD - the search function didn't widen the net.

Here's the latest missive from SciNews ... totally unconnected the context of that board ... the guy seems to be freaking out ...

Science in the News NYT Thread

    kalter.rauch - 06:11am Feb 3, 2003 EST
    (# 855 of 855) Earth vs <^> <^> <^>
Lchick......

Shutup!!!

The Columbia disaster isn't for YOU or the rest of your ilk. All YOU see are the one or two brown faces you can use to pursue your nefarious ends.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Raises the point 'who are the Columbia news items for?' and why does he object to comment in the form of an excellent article in the London Guardian?

lchic - 08:35am Feb 3, 2003 EST (# 8547 of 8548)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Shortly after Columbia lifted off, two weeks ago, a piece of insulating foam on its external fuel tank came off and was believed to have struck the left wing of the shuttle, possibly loosening a tile. .....

http://www.observer.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,887231,00.html

... it emerged last night that Bush and senior officials were warned that Nasa was facing an unprecedented crisis over its safety management and was in danger of a 'catastrophic disaster' during a shuttle mission.

More Messages Recent Messages (1 following message)

 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