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.
(8924 previous messages)
lchic
- 12:29pm Feb 15, 2003 EST (#
8925 of 8928) ~~~~ It got understood and exposed
~~~~
The four laws of Dalton are—constant proportion, reciprocal
proportion, multiple proportion, and compound proportion.
http://www.bartleby.com/81/1038.html
[ ? This might be adopted-adapted to become the four laws
of IR ]
rshow55
- 12:32pm Feb 15, 2003 EST (#
8926 of 8928)
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.
Anti-war march 'to be UK's biggest ever' Simon
Jeffery and agencies Saturday February 15, 2003 http://www.guardian.co.uk/antiwar/story/0,12809,896265,00.html
London today became the scene for what is
expected to be the biggest peace rally in British history.
Throughout the world, millions gathered to protest at the
prospect of a war in Iraq. In hundreds of cities, including
Damascus, Athens, Seoul, Rome, Tokyo and Sydney,
demonstrators marched, chanted and unfurled banners to
protest against conflict in the Middle East.
The London demonstration, which is currently
estimated to be 750,000 people strong and could eventually
attract 1m, began ahead of its scheduled starting time as
the numbers congregating at Embankment forced police to
allow them to march through Westminster and Whitehall
earlier than expected.
Peace is an important value - though there are times fights
are necessary - and surrender of essential values can't be
tolerated. There has to be a sense of proportion - and
after a point - that requires agreement on issues of
fact .
Disarming Iraq http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/15/opinion/15SAT1.html
As much as the feuding members of the United
Nations Security Council might like Hans Blix and Mohamed
ElBaradei to settle the question of war or peace with Iraq,
these two mild-mannered civil servants can't make that
fateful judgment. All they can do, which they did again
yesterday, is to tell the Council how their inspection
efforts are faring. So-so was the answer. It's up to the
Council members — especially the veto-wielding quintet of
the United States, Britain, France, Russia and China — to
decide whether Iraq is disarming."
The notion of disarmament - in relation to the risks and
costs that matter - has to be discussed - and operationally
defined - with a sense of proportion set out - reasonably
explicitly - by the nations involved.
When things are complicated, truth is our only hope:
http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7a163/296
If the body of assertions about fact on this thread were
checked - including facts about missile defense - with
patterns of verification prototyped here - some of the most
essential - longstanding problems of word stability and
prosperity could be solved.
That's what Casey told me to try to do - saying that - if
things were desperate enough - the only chance was to "come
in through The New York Times."
His reasoning was simple. The TIMES, right or wrong - kept
together the single most influential - and basically, the
single best - body of intellectuals in the United States. So
far, though I've had my problems dealing with the TIMES - I've
had no basic reason to doubt that.
rshow55
- 01:38pm Feb 15, 2003 EST (#
8927 of 8928)
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.
Antiwar Rallies Raise a Chorus Across Europe By ALAN
COWELL http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/16/international/europe/16EURO.html
Iraq Said to Plan Strategy of Delay and Urban Battle
By MICHAEL R. GORDON http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/16/international/middleeast/16IRAQ.html
The strategy outlined is militarily obvious
- and would impose a large death toll - and other losses -
on Iraq and invading forces.
It seems to me that war ought to be avoided. But if
it is not avoided - it is important, from many points of view
- that it not be more unjust or ugly than it has to be. I
think that the Jordanians made a brilliant and important
suggestion - that could be very important if we want a
difficult transition to occur - and occur with as much grace
and legitimacy as possible.
Jordan Pressing U.S. to Offer Exile to Hussein By
JOHN F. BURNS http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-EU-Iraq.html
AMMAN, Jordan, Feb. 11 — Officials at high
levels of Jordan's government say they are pressing the
United States to offer President Saddam Hussein and perhaps
50 of his top aides a guarantee of safe haven elsewhere in
the Arab world if they will quit power in Iraq.
Jordan's suggestion - implemented - might save tens or
hundreds of thousands of lives - and enormous agony.
(1 following message)
New York Times on the Web Forums
Science
Missile Defense
|