New York Times on the Web Forums Science

Missile Defense

Russian military leaders have expressed concern about US plans for a national missile defense system. Will defense technology be limited by possibilities for a strategic imbalance? Is this just SDI all over again?

rshowalter - 04:39pm May 25, 2001 EST (#4203 of 4213)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

I'm trying to give a balanced response.

It will take me a while longer, to get comfortable -- but I can say this -- almarst has expressed some very clear concerns, and ones that seem entirely justified, on the basis of wrenching experience.

Given the way that the US and NATO conducted "peace talks" under circumstances where the the talks were not any effort at peace at all-but instruments of war, including much deception, you have to expect that the Russians fear that the US may do anything that the US is physically capable of doing to Russia, with no presumption of good faith on the part of the US at all. Only deterrance makes sense, for a while, as a beginning position for Russia.

Not necessarily nuclear deterrance, I don't believe. But plainly sufficient deterrance.

The case of Yugoslavia, which seems to have involved some gross deception as well, reinforces the concern.

The key thing, for me, is that the US has not been willing to let matters be arranged so that key facts can be determined.

Yes, in a sense, "the age of empire" is over. But, based on current actions - and recent expressions of contempt, and very recent ignorings of contractual committments and expectations - -you can't expect the US to be taken at its "benevelent word." -- Because, too often, it has not kept its word. Deception, in the Cold War, was serious indeed. The inhumanity of American actions, if any value be placed on nonAmerican lives, was serious indeed.

The US welcoming of Nazis speaks volumes, in my opinion, about what US military and governmental morality has really been.

And it is not at all clear that very many American citizens would have agreed to what was done. They surely did not know it.

The key issues, now, the place where hope mostly is, involve not negotiation of agreements themselves -- that must come later -- it is getting some basic facts straigt - in ways that need to be operationally, or morally forcing -- so that negotiations can occur with "everybody reading off the same page" -- and that page correct, as far as the basic facts go.

And that looks doable. That's promising.

possumdag - 04:58pm May 25, 2001 EST (#4204 of 4213)
Possumdag@excite.com

How long does it take for 'facts' and 'truth' to emerge through an historians take on history. Retrospectively some wars and battles are clear. Others are clouded.

A question to consider is 'has everything been thrown into the ring for consideration?' or are some matters hidden and only much later exposed.

The reality for the people of Yugoslavia is (as posted way above) they really did not know what was overtaking them, happening, or why. The chaos of economic breakdown factored in there somewhere, together with the redundant thinking of old patterns that had to be moved along for new.

Perhaps patterns of emergent 'war' need to be worked out, and the fixing done and understood without bombs and carnage.

rshowalter - 05:03pm May 25, 2001 EST (#4205 of 4213)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Yes !