|
![[F]](../_images/site.gif) 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?
    (10187 previous messages)
possumdag
- 08:25am Oct 7, 2001 EST (#10188
of 10204)
"Today is silhouetted in my mind" Copp, L A
(1971)
Afghanistan (interesting sites) was a zone along the great silk
route, a melting pot of peoples. Very determined peoples when it
came to accepting others. The British were repelled three times
while the Russians were the C20 flavour - their sinking a lot of
capital and advisory into Afghanistan. A mistake here was the
Russian attempt to fully transport the Russian system into
Afghanistan - without having regard for their topography,
environment and culture.
Afghanistan Boundaries
.. Uzbekistan has proved to be a reliable partner and an
active supporter of progressive ideas, general democratic norms.
It is evident that the country’s activity to facilitate the
resolution of complex international conflicts (Afghanistan,
Taji-kistan), form a new system of regional, national and global
security (initiated nuclear free zone in Central Asia), oppose
international terrorism, drug trafficking, illegal weapons trade,
prove that Uzbekistan has got the right to become an estimated and
reliable member of the world community. Third, Uzbekistan
demonstrates stable economic growth, social guarantees so
important for this specific society, national, communal and
confessional consent, the combination of historic, cultural and
national traditions with the best achievements of the leading
countries. Fourth, the open international policy allows world
publics to study the unique history, culture, and national
traditions of our peoples. http://www.can.naytov.com/ingl/presidents/uz_pr.htm
*Afghan history links with Russia http://www.tntech.edu/www/acad/hist/russee.html
http://www.necco.net/category/education_science/military_history_and_science.htm
DOCUMENTARY:film: AFGHAN TRAP The story of the Soviet involvement
in Afghanistan throught the eyes of the Soviet elite "Alpha" unit,
Soviet military advisors, senior KGB officers, senior Party
officials, Afghan communists and Islamic militants. (From Russia in
English, Russian and Pashto, English subtitles)> PG CC
*Chronology of Afghan history (to April 2001) http://www.afghan-web.com/history/chron/index3.html
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0107264.html
rshowalter
- 09:13am Oct 7, 2001 EST (#10189
of 10204) 
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu
11111pbh
10/7/01 7:41am
"Tajikistan seems a logical ally for tactical
action. . . . . Is it possible to focus on new borders for the
weak state, or would that just create Kashmire like problems? "
Just a few thoughts, that will only be worthwhile if they
stimulate better informed thoughts, by people who know more (who
could call me on the phone if they'd like.) Here are some of my
thoughts, not nearly well enough informed, but perhaps suggestive,
about making contact with the people involved, well enough to get
workable answers.
If the people involved would do you the favor of listening
to you, you might talk about things connected, but involving less
risk, until you knew enough, and they knew enough, that checkable
trust and cooperation might be possible, and mutually comfortable.
I'd think about an indirect discussion, for practice, and on its
own merits.
Suppose the people who would have to be involved in
military-political adjustment had some of their people talk together
about 2 way or 3way (neighbors, plus Americans) cooperative or
interactive efforts doing something real, important and technical --
with real stakes.
Removing land mines might be a very natural choice. Lets talk of
the 3-way case.
Each group would have a team, in as full
communication with other teams as comfortable for the people
involved, but autonomous, working to remove land mines. And the
groups watch each other, to learn how they do it, and make
suggestions (not orders) if and when these seem sensible.
Work out how to do that, for the people involved, and start doing
it. By the time that is combed out (and the thinking through might
happen in hours and days) you'd be ready to move, as people are
comfortable, to the very important, but very complicated and high
risk, issues of new borders, and the power shifts those new borders
would entail.
If I were involved, I'd take some of the people involved to the
Patent Office, and in about two days, get some dead solid common
ground on technical issues that matter in the specific land mine
removal tasks.
possumdag
- 09:24am Oct 7, 2001 EST (#10190
of 10204)
"Today is silhouetted in my mind" Copp, L A
(1971)
I'd cag a lift to the Patent Office in preference to the mine
fields - if that's ok!
rshowalter
- 09:37am Oct 7, 2001 EST (#10191
of 10204)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu
You and I would have good stuff to do at the Patent Office.
rshowalter
- 09:44am Oct 7, 2001 EST (#10192
of 10204)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu
Sandra Blakeslee and I would, as well -- people ought to be be
clearer on how good people are at processing information (of some
kinds) and how lousy at others. We need to build on our strengths,
and know our weaknesses. Somebody interested in communication, and
the brain, and psychology, could learn a LOT watching what people
can do, and the systems that have evolved, at the Patent Office.
Cooking pancakes. Out for an hour.
 (12 following messages)
  
New York Times on the Web Forums Science
Missile Defense
|
