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 (8938 previous messages)

lchic - 03:18pm Feb 15, 2003 EST (# 8939 of 8948)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

""Bahrain, a key Washington ally in the Gulf, hosts more than 1,000 US military personnel.

Five Bahraini men have been arrested on suspicion of plotting "terrorist acts" in the Gulf kingdom - home to the US Fifth Fleet

Correspondents say anti-US sentiment is growing in the Gulf region as the US and UK continue to mass troops and equipment there ahead of a possible war against Iraq.

Scores of people joined an anti-war demonstration outside the UN mission in Bahrain on Friday night

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2766159.stm

lchic - 03:25pm Feb 15, 2003 EST (# 8940 of 8948)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Transparency International guy beaten up by 'Mulgabe'

lchic - 03:26pm Feb 15, 2003 EST (# 8941 of 8948)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Blair - "Saddam staying in power --- will have consequences paid in blood"

lchic - 03:32pm Feb 15, 2003 EST (# 8942 of 8948)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Kent State University - OHIO 1970 - anti-war protest - 4 dead

students shot by American bullets

______________

lchic - 03:54pm Feb 15, 2003 EST (# 8943 of 8948)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

bbc | Anti-war protests: Can the rallies make a difference?

Protesters against the build up towards military action in Iraq are gathering around the world.

What do anti-war rallies achieve? Are you taking part? Or do you think the protesters are misguided?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/talking_point/default.stm

lchic - 03:56pm Feb 15, 2003 EST (# 8944 of 8948)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Ivory Coast - Mast Grave 1000 bodies

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/2766717.stm

bbbuck - 03:57pm Feb 15, 2003 EST (# 8945 of 8948)

Thanks Mazza9 for that post. It was enlightening.

I tune in here, scrolling away, as I'm prone to do, so I can use this forum as a defense against some of the other administrative actions that have taken place on this forum.

If I had to characterize MD I would say it was a 'Bush Forum' with 3 members. I hate to say this but I find it 'intriguing' that these individuals (looneychic, rshow55, alarmist(almarst2002) can post link after link slop after slop day-in, day-out. I also find it significant that the nytimes.com administrators do nothing about this nonsense. I mean come on they have a 'Science News Poetry' forum where all of this nonsense would be on topic. Why don't they all go there? And ofcourse some of them (lchic) post in both places. Almost2002 posts here and on the 'Bush Forum'(where he belongs).

I'm sorry but I can't help but laugh and say to myself 'What and the hell is this slop?'.

Well carry on good sir, and hope to see you posting in the future.

ps. I have never seen the science moderator post, though I have seen a plug for him on the moderator general info. I wonder if he still exists? (here, anyways)

almarst2002 - 03:58pm Feb 15, 2003 EST (# 8946 of 8948)

To George W. Bush, the future "relevance" of the United Nations rests on its willingness to follow his lead into war with Iraq. But the choice he presents could mean irrelevance to the U.N. whichever way it goes, while putting the world on a risky road toward escalating violence and endless war.

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2003/021303a.html

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