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 - 12:57pm Feb 13, 2003 EST (# 8872 of 8874)
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 started 2003 on this thread with this:

7177 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.UeMta7WD3SF.459291@.f28e622/8700

" I think this is a year where some lessons are going to have to be learned about stability and function of international systems, in terms of basic requirements of order , symmetry , and harmony - at the levels that make sense - and learned clearly and explicitly enough to produce systems that have these properties by design, not by chance."

Looking at the past five weeks, it is hard for me not to feel that things may be going very well - and even that the Bush administration - though it may have "slight defects" - may be doing some things very well, everything considered. And other nations and institutions may be doing fairly well, too. Problems are being faced , and fought about - rather than papered over.

Since these problems are small, compared to the resources that are available to handle them - that's hopeful.

I don't think there's any doubt that the US is taking some positions that need to be questioned and modified - and don't think there's any doubt that some big patterns, that have continued by default - need to be reconsidered - readjusted - or even junked. All the same, though there are spots where moral indignation may be a reasonable response to American doings - - the idea that the US has any monopoly on dishonesty, evasion, self-serving, and muddle seems grossly out of kilter. I find almarst's concerns interesting, I'm sympathetic, but sometimes I find them tiresome - especially because they can seem to be imbalanced. There were good reasons why the US fought the Cold War against Communisim - though that ought to be over - and much should have been cleaned up long ago. Russians have some imperfections, too.

How Do You Say 'Shut Up' in Russian? By MICHAEL WINES http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/09/weekinreview/09WINE.html

A Russian Tilts at Graft (It Could Be a Quixotic Task) By SABRINA TAVERNISE http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/10/international/europe/10MOSC.html

Information for Democracy, surveyed 7,504 Russians to piece together what was the first comprehensive picture of Russian graft. . . . The researchers estimated that Russian citizens pay about $3 billion in bribes annually — about half of what they pay in income tax. Business owners, meanwhile, were found to fork over a whopping $33 billion to keep things running smoothly, a sum just less than half of all of last year's federal budget revenues. . . . . Corruption is not, as many here will claim, an inextricable part of the mysterious Russian soul, but a curable sickness, Mr. Satarov says. That attitude and his lack of cynicism sets him apart from the Russian elite, who roll their eyes at the naïveté of anticorruption campaigns.

With those problems, there really do have to be limits on how much moral instruction the rest of the world takes from Russia. Russia can be exactly right. But not exactly infallible.

Almarst's postings are important, and I value them. But I think the moral indignation sometimes drowns out some other things.

rshow55 - 01:00pm Feb 13, 2003 EST (# 8873 of 8874)
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.

People are looking seriously at serious problems - but problems simple enough that, if they are faced - they can be pretty well solved.

NATO Talks Over Turkey in Deadlock By RICHARD BERNSTEIN http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/13/international/europe/13NATO.html

NATO Cancels Meeting on Iraq Standoff By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Filed at 10:54 a.m. ET http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-NATO-Iraq.html

Blair Demands EU Not Exclude Force Against Iraq By REUTERS Filed at 10:50 a.m. ET http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/international/international-iraq-eu-blair.html

- - - -

North Korea Wants Arms and More Aid From U.S. By MICHAEL R. GORDON with FELICITY BARRINGER http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/13/international/13KORE.html

China Asserts It Has Worked to End Nuclear Crisis By ELISABETH ROSENTHAL http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/13/international/asia/13BEIJ.html

U.S.: N. Korean Sanctions Not An Option By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Filed at 10:55 a.m. ET http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-UN-NKorea-Nuclear.html

UNITED NATIONS (AP) -- The United States said Thursday that U.N. sanctions against North Korea for its nuclear program are not an option now.

U.S. deputy ambassador Richard Williamson said the Bush administration wants to pursue a diplomatic solution.

(1 following message)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense