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 (8845 previous messages)

rshow55 - 07:21pm Feb 12, 2003 EST (# 8846 of 8849) 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.

Lchic, 8842 asks : "Showalter if someone asked you, as they did, 'What is your VISION?' would you have a clear understanding within as to what you wanted to achieve with your life?

My personal Vison Statement:

1496 http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7b2bd/1662

1496 http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7b2bd/1662

1496 http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7b2bd/1662

1496 http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7b2bd/1662

from God is the Projection of Mans Unrealised Potential - Discuss

. Here are some things that lchic and I are working for – many of them expressed in various ways on the NYT Missile Defense forum, and on these Guardian-Talk boards.

I've made a number of postings on that thread - especially since 1447 http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7b2bd/1607

7999 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.DbsQax2F3gq.355033@.f28e622/9525

"Lunarchick and I have worked hard to focus some patterns, and believe we've worked out some. Here are two at the level needed to think about exception handling . The golden rule (a principle of symettry) helps sort out a lot of things, I believe. The notion of disciplined beauty (harmony) helps sort out a lot of things, I believe.

(search "golden rule" or see http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md01000s/DetailNGR.htm )

(search "disciplined beauty" or see http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7b085/157 - - also set out in 5438-40 5438 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@168.6ypeaWGbV32^117411@.f28e622/6810 of this thread.

http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7b2bd/1657

rshow55 - 07:22pm Feb 12, 2003 EST (# 8847 of 8849) 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.

If the president of the USA was asked 'What was his vision' ... he might reply ........ ?

He might reply that he wanted to serve the United States, and the honor of his family. If he's careful - - he can.

If an Iraqi was picked out from a crowd and asked ... how might we expect them to reply?

He'd want a better world for the people he cares about, I'd expect - - and want to serve the needs, and fit in with the ideals, of the people he cares about.

So how do all these 'visions' get poured into the cauldron of life .... and be made to happen?

I think we could all do the things needed to fit the needs of mankind, and any God there may be - without being any wiser, braver, or better than we are - if only we'd remember that - when it matters enough - we have a moral obligation to find out what the truth is - at the level of fact. It doesn't seem like so much to ask - but it would be enough - from where we are - for a much, much better world.

" People say and do things. .

" What people say and do have consequences, for themselves and for other people. .

" People need to deal with and understand these consequences, for all sorts of practical, down to earth reasons. .

" So everybody has a stake in right answers on questions of fact that they have to use as assumptions for what they say and do.

If the bolded point, just above, were more widely and deeply understood - and linked to the simple points just above it -- a great many things in the world would be better - and people, just as they are, could solve many of the most important and practical problems they face.

As of now, the idea that "everybody has a stake in right answers on questions of fact that they have to use as assumptions for what they say and do" is actively denied whenever anyone with power actually objects.

Instead, the point should be common ground.

Right now, that means that some leaders of nation states should ask some questions - and insist on right answers. http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md01000s/DetailNGR.htm

More Messages Recent Messages (2 following messages)

 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