New York Times on the Web Forums
Science
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.
(8869 previous messages)
rshow55
- 09:02am Feb 13, 2003 EST (#
8870 of 8871)
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.
I agree with much in the lead editorial today - but would
point out some word choices:
Back to the United Nations http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/13/opinion/13THU1.html
"With Saddam Hussein stalling and the
United States and its allies quarreling, the world seems to
be lurching toward an endgame in which the United Nations
dithers and the Bush administration goes to war
against Iraq without broad international support. This is
the worst possible scenario, one that would leave the U.N.
weakened and the United States saddled with all the
responsibility for rebuilding a post-Saddam Iraq.
"The Security Council already appears to be
headed for another futile trans-Atlantic spat
at its next meeting tomorrow. This gathering could be better
used by the Council to pull itself together and approve a
resolution setting a date for Iraq to comply with
disarmament demands or face the likelihood of united
military action.
Are the concerns being raised in NATO, and at the Security
Council
i stalling ?
i dithering?
i weakening of international patterns of
legitimacy?
i exercises in futility?
Are we dealing with a small spat ?
Or are we dealing with a situation where - if leaders of
nation states take the time to figure out what they could be
proud to do - we could all do much better - in ways
fully consistent with every valid security need the United
States and other countries involve have - that they can
explain to themselves and others.
"When Dr. Rice wrote this, I believe she wrote something
profound and hopeful.
" Today, the international community has
the best chance since the rise of the nation-state in the
seventeenth century to build a world where great powers
compete in peace instead of continually prepare for war. . .
. . . The United States will build on these common interests
to promote global security. " " The National Security
Strategy of the United States ," http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/20/politics/20STEXT_FULL.html
. page 2.
The whole world hopes for that. But if hopes are to
solidify into reality - we need to communicate effectively - -
work enough things out between people and powers so that they
know enough to compete in peace.
That takes a lot of talking - negotiation of a shared space
- - communication good enough so that - when it matters for
practical affairs intended meanings and percieved meanings
match well enough to be safe.
A communication model http://www.worldtrans.org/TP/TP1/TP1-17.HTML
"For us to find that shared space - and maintain it - and
know we have it -- - we need empathy.
And clarity. 8847 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.GdSwayWJ381.417202@.f28e622/10373
Right now, that means that some leaders of nation states
should ask some questions - and insist on right answers.
Here's part of an undelivered speech by Franklin D.
Roosevelt, written shortly before his death:
" Today, we are faced with the pre-eminent
fact that, if civilization is to survive, we must cultivate
the science of human relationships --- the ability of all
peoples, of all kinds, to live together and work together in
the same world, at peace."
This quote was on the last page of the American Heritage
Picture History of World War II , by C.L. Sulzberger and
the editors of American Heritage , published in 1966.
It has been a long time since WWII - and a long time since
Vietnam.
Right now - what's needed is clarity - and ways to
find shared space - not to dismiss the humanity
and status of those who happen to disagree with the Bush
administration. These days - it appears that most of the
world, outside the US - does disagree with the Bush
administration.
Communication is basic - and at the level of leadership -
messages have to be clear.
Given the current situation - I wonder how the United
States
(1 following message)
New York Times on the Web Forums
Science
Missile Defense
|