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 - 02:01pm Feb 7, 2003 EST (# 8659 of 8660)
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.

At the same time, I think it is useful to consider the amount of concern and good faith that the United States is showing, and think that it is important to put almarst's 8653 in context.

The occupation of Iraq is just one of the series of steps the New Rome is taking to a New World Order. With possibly, probably and even very likely fatal consequences.

The United States is renegotiating international law - and there are some solid reasons - as well as more questionable reasons - why it is trying to do so. I've had some disagreements with the Bush administration, but they are trying to solve problems -rather than simply let them fester.

If there are costs of war - there are also costs of the containment policy that defeated the Soviet Union and contained Communism generally - a policy that has caused, in large part - many of the most serious problems of the world today. The Bush administration is trying to do better - and has some excellent reasons for wanting to.

We could use some

New World Orderliness

New World Symmetry . . . and

New World Harmony .

If the Bush administration's approaches to international order don't fit the Russians, the French, the Germans - and other nations - discussion is certainly going on, and these nations should argue for alternatives. On this thread, there are a number of references to renegotiation of international law, and reasons for it - and here they are collected:

4486 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@192.mTneaYgzTVZ^617330@.f28e622/5668

4600 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@192.teHVaJ3hU2t^1382380@.f28e622/5811

4680 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@192.uljma8zvU72^1640680@.f28e622/5917

4975 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@192.ohpbakdxVJn^0@.f28e622/6280

5072 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@192.utntaMqsVzi^666697@.f28e622/6383

5117 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@192.zhmza7jDVoQ^292388@.f28e622/6438

5118-9 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@192.zhmza7jDVoQ^292410@.f28e622/6439

5144 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@192.eem4aQPXV5l^174781@.f28e622/6471

5147 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@192.zhmza7jDVoQ^292612@.f28e622/6474

5174 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@192.CidlawfyVsd^308812@.f28e622/6506

5177 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@192.CidlawfyVsd^308812@.f28e622/6509

5200 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@192.jnOiaHlwVh6^151916@.f28e622/6534

5203 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@192.jnOiaHlwVh6^151916@.f28e622/6537

6022-6026 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@168.qQiLaSeqW86^1549883@.f28e622/7492

6271 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@168.NbHga3PCXva^2220073@.f28e622/7769

6398 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@168.QRjUaLmkXyH^642346@.f28e622/7902

6549-50 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@168.t8evaUohXeM^1169229@.f28e622/8053

6557-58 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@168.Kb01aSVSYdY^1323405@.f28e622/8061

6776-8 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@168.bvzYastmY4b^0@.f28e622/8280

Here are some phrases from these references:

We're in a situation where international law is in the process of being renegotiated - at the level of ideas and at the level of force.

There's a lot of craziness - but a lot of reasonable people, working hard, are involved, too.

If we can get some fights settled that have to be settled - workably - there is a lot of reason for a lot of hope. For that to happen without too much carnage - there have to be limits to what people can do - and threaten - even inside borders.

And there have to be better agreements than exist today about the "right to lie." . . .

I think it is a hopeful as well as a troubled time.

" If the result is war, it will be a great human failure and tragedy - but the consequences for the wo

(1 following message)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense