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 - 01:55pm Feb 23, 2003 EST (# 9239 of 9242)
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.

Power and Leadership: The Real Meaning of Iraq http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/23/opinion/23SUN1.html says that

" More discussion is the only road that will get the world to the right outcome — concerted effort by a wide coalition of nations to force Saddam Hussein to give up his weapons of mass destruction. We need another debate. Another struggle to make this the United Nations' leadership moment.

That struggle shouldn't be as hard as it is.

However incompletely and inconsistently, Iraq is saying that it is giving up on weapons of mass destruction and agressive designs.

The United States is saying that, if Iraq does so - there need not be war.

We're at an impasse, in large part - over questions of fact. And assumptions. Is treachery a complete - or even a particularly large - contributing part of the impasses we face?

The physical and logical interactions of the world are complex enough that "reasonable" answers - patterns that really hang together when connected - are very sparse. For this reason, right answers very often converge. With enough effort - if people are indeed consciously facing the real situation - the odds of getting good answers are excellent.

That means that issues of unconsious processing - and repression (in the psychological sense, as well as the political sense) are important.

People believe what feels right. But after enough evidence - enough care - quite often we almost always, almost all of us, feel right about the same things.

Almost always - but not always. When we don't come to agreements - issues of unconscious processing - and repression ought to be faced - with enough humility that all involved can admit that they might be missing, or misjudging some of the situation themselves.

rshow55 - 01:57pm Feb 23, 2003 EST (# 9240 of 9242)
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.

If we got that far - we'd be well ahead of where we are now - and the world would be a more hopeful place.

It would be more resonable to hope for legitimate exercises of power.

And reasonable to hope that, quite often, the last resort of violence could be avoided.

Maybe in the Iraqi case.

Maybe in the case of North Korea.

Maybe in other cases, too - including many of the cases that have concerned Almarst.

Almarst , since May 2001, has been suggesting that the United States has been governed by a conspiracy - and, in his view, a very evil one. The idea of conspiriacies is common enough - and sometimes true. The idea of unconscous and repressed logical processes can provide an alternative explanation, often enough. Without any need for people to forget that they are responsible for what they do - in significant ways - whatever their conscious intentions, or rationales, may happen to be.

When people resist checking facts - or even doubt that there can be facts to check - issues of repression can be involved.

As Repress Yourself By LAUREN SLATER http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/23/magazine/23REPRESSION.html points out, repression can be healthy. None of us can attend to everything we do - or feel. But if consequences matter enough - it can be worth doing so - and it can be reasonable to expect others to do so, as well.

The logical implication of unconscious processing and repression is clear. We can make mistakes - logical, practical, and moral -- and yet feel very sure of ourselves. Maybe most sure when we have the most reason to doubt.

(2 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense