New York Times on the Web Forums
Resource
Area for Forum Hosts and Moderators
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.
(4276 previous messages)
rshow55
- 02:36pm Sep 12, 2002 EST (#
4277 of 17697) 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.
Posted September 5 - http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7a163/332
The Bush administration is right that
interdiction has to be an option - and it is a major point.
It is a point that I've been arguing, in detail (but also in
context) since September 25, 2000 rshow55
4/21/02 3:14pm - . But interdiction has to be a last
resort -- and it has to be justified (preferably before the
fact, at least after the fact) in credible ways - lest the
world get far worse than it is. For stability, interdictions
that can be justified , and that make sense in terms of
balance, may have to be an option for many or all nation
states. The United States can't ask for a right to interdict
for itself and long deny this.
rshow55
- 07:05pm Sep 12, 2002 EST (#
4278 of 17697) 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.
G.O.P. Presses Democrats to Act Quickly on an Iraq
Vote By DAVID STOUT http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/12/politics/12CND-CONG.html
The most responsible, patriotic thing that the Democrats
can do is to ask careful and penetrating
questions.
After enron - - and many other deceptions - the
patriotic thing is to ask the administration to tell the
truth .
MD4218 rshow55
9/7/02 8:48am
The Bully's Pulpit By PAUL KRUGMAN http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/06/opinion/06KRUG.htm
sets out points that are vital - that should be checked - and
that, if checked sensibly, would stop the Bush presidency for
all practical purposes.
The Bush team's pronouncements rely on
doublethink, the ability to believe two contradictory things
at the same time.
We are in a dangerous time in our history, when Krugman's
words are speakable, and ignored. The whole world should
notice.
Other Krugman pieces - and related points, are set out in
Pschwar, Casablanca - - - and terror http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7a163/296
The question of a "vast right-wing conspiracy" is raised,
and given focus, in . The Smoke Machine http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/29/opinion/29KRUG.html
and
Connect the Dots by PAUL KRUGMAN http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/02/opinion/02KRUG.html
I believe that the "American Empire" is as large as it is,
and has some of the characteristics that it does, because the
interest of the United States, as a nation, has diverged from
the interests of a "military-industrial-political complex"
constructed to fight the Cold War, that has taken a dangerous
degree of control over US government affairs since that time.
The American "missile defense" program is interesting for some
of the same reasons that the Enron affair http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/1/Transcripts/721/4/business/_ENRON-PRIMER.html
. . . is interesting.
On the subject of this thread, the "missile defense"
programs are nonsensical and corrupt, in the senses that ought
to matter both technically or militarily, and illustrates
broader corruptions that concern the whole world, because
American power is as great as it now is, and is used as it now
is.
Checking on these issues - and issues implicit and explicit
in President Bush's speech -- is important - but for it to
happen, some leaders of nation states are going to have to be
interested - as I believe they should be, because it is risky
to be led, and to defer, to an administration that is taking
positions that go wrong, and produce unnecessary risks, costs,
and fighting, again and again.
Here are some other OpEd pieces by Paul Krugman quoted on
the NYT Missile Defense thread:
The Big Lie http://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/27/opinion/27KRUG.html
Bad Heir Day http://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/30/opinion/30KRUG.html
The Great Divide http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/29/opinion/29KRUG.html
At Long Last? http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/05/opinion/05KRUG.html
The White Stuff http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/12/opinion/12KRUG.html
Losing Latin America http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/16/opinion/16KRUG.html
The Angry People http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/23/opinion/23KRUG.html
A number of links discussing Krugman's pieces are set out
in MD1741 rshow55
4/24/02 10:37am
(13419 following messages)
New York Times on the Web Forums
Resource
Area for Forum Hosts and Moderators Missile Defense
|