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 (8594 previous messages)

rshow55 - 03:41pm Feb 5, 2003 EST (# 8595 of 8598) 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.

Text: Great Britain's Remarks to the U.N. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/05/national/05text_britain.html

" Three months ago, we united to send Iraq an uncompromising message: Cooperate fully with weapons inspectors or face disarmament by force.

" . . . . Resolution 1441 was a powerful reminder of the importance of international law and of the authority of the Security Council itself.

Text: Russia's Remarks to the U.N. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/05/international/05text_russia.html

"Mr. President, Russia views this meeting today through the prism of the consistent efforts of the Security Council of the United Nations to find a political settlement to the situation surrounding Iraq on the basis of complete, scrupulous compliance with the resolutions on it.

"The unanimous adoption of Resolution 1441 of the U.N. Security Council and the deployment of international inspectors in Iraq have demonstrated the ability of the international community to act together in the interest of attaining a common goal.

"We are convinced that maintaining the unity of the world community, primarily within the context of the U.N. Security Council, and our concerted action in strict compliance with United Nations Charter and Security Council resolutions, are the most reliable way to resolve the problem of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq through political means.

"The fact that we all want to resolve this problem, that is something that nobody should doubt. It was with that in mind that we have listened very closely to the presentation given by Secretary of State Powell.

"Russia believed and continues to believe that the Security Council, and through it the entire international community, must have all of the necessary information it needs in order to answer the question of whether or not there are remaining weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

"The information that was given to us today definitely will require very serious and thorough study.

More Messages Recent Messages (3 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