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 - 11:10am Feb 16, 2003 EST (# 8983 of 8986)
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.

Getting some problems sorted out would do great honor to the United States - and the Bush administration - which, with Blair's administration in UK, is doing some things that are sensible by historical standards. Bush, Blair, and their administrations are doing some things that I think they can reasonably be proud of, in a world with hard choices - though I think they are making some mistakes.

I sympathize with almarst's concerns, share them, and sometimes share his indignation. But I'm struck, lately, by how very well things are going - by humane standards - and in terms of the reasonable national interests of the United States. The American interests and world interests set out in Wizard's Chess http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/05/opinion/05SUN1.html - - have an excellent chance of being well met. Better met than, by historical standards, anyone could have expected. The reasonable needs of other nations have an excellent chance, by historical standards, of being met, too.

8922 <a href="/webin/WebX?14@28.ruOXa6gK3hg.0@.f28e622/10448">rshow55 2/15/03 12:18pm</a>

I've been spending some more time with Adolf Berle's Power , published in 1969, and especially its chapter III - Philosophies of International Power - which I hope many diplomats read. . Berle's chapter III begins as follows:

" There cannot be institutions of world government without world consensus on their underlying philosopy. Though there are reasons justifying hope that such philosophy and institutions will emerge - indeed are dimly visable on the horizon even now - it would be cruelly unrealistic to overestimate the institutions now existing, still more so to suggest that an idea system commands general assent on which world government could be based. "

Rereading Berle's Chapter II, I find it hard not to be impressed with progress that's been made. And, for all the agony and carnage - and risks before us - optimistic. For all the problems and imperfections - intellectual, moral, and practical - of the world we live in - we're closer to a "world of order" - and humanly good order - than we've ever been before. For the last fifty years, the UN has been much less than its founders had hoped for - but it may be that now - through a lot of hard work - patterns of international law are being thought and negotiated into being. It seems to me that if people keep at it, a lot could go very well. By historical standards - a lot is going very well now.

rshow55 - 11:12am Feb 16, 2003 EST (# 8984 of 8986)
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.

Peking Duct Tape By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/16/opinion/16FRIE.html speaks of a "new world system" coming into being - - "divided between the World of Order and the World of Disorder. " There's plenty of disorder, surely. But by historical standards - it seems to me to be impressive how powerful the forces for order are - and how close we are to patterns of orderliness, symmetry, and harmony that may be very imperfect - but are still a lot better than any the world has ever known before.

My first posting this year began with this:

7177 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@93.axIya8leZCh^1311940@.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. "

It seems to me that those lessons may be in the process of being learned.

People are facing up to problems - getting involved - and often, not running away. This is a fearsome, but also a very hopeful time. If responsible people at the Security Council and NATO continue to act in ways that make them proud - and that they can proudly, clearly explain to themselves and the people they care about - this could be a very hopeful time. With some sensible action, and some checking - there's plenty of room for improvement.

(2 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense