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?

rshowalt - 12:14pm May 30, 2001 EST (#4337 of 4466)

We aren't dealing with "just posturing" -- and we aren't dealing with simple consistency, either.

We have a mess -- the Cold War was a mess in many ways, the current situation is a mess -- and anybody who wants pure, simple moral indignation, in any direction, is going to have to ignore a lot. We need to reframe the situation -- cut some Gordian knots.

It would be nice to get accomodations that serve human needs, including, insofar as possible, the important practical and emotional needs of justice. But "simple" justice isn't possible here -- there are too many conflicting needs.

We need a reframing, that works, and an accounting of what actually happens, that people can use so they are "reading off the same page."

The truth, ugly as it may be, offers hope. Anyting else, in such a complex situation, just isn't workable. It isn't a time for anybody to say " trust me."

It is a time when hope depends on a common body of checkable facts, and negotiations based on those facts.

But here, lies are very dangerous. There are too many of them. Unless checking is morally forcing , or in any event, forced one way or another - we don't have a stable situation. But there's hope -- internet usages make it hard to hide.

rshowalt - 12:19pm May 30, 2001 EST (#4338 of 4466)

Core issues about Missile Defense include: Is it any good at all? .... and .... If not, how on earth could the idea have gotten so far? MD2651: rshowalter 4/27/01 9:37am

Articles in The New York Times cast much light on the question.

MD2563: rshowalter 4/24/01 7:47pm . . . MD2564: rshowalter 4/24/01 7:47pm

rshowalt - 12:29pm May 30, 2001 EST (#4339 of 4466)

Some of the reasons to WANT anti-missile systems are good reasons. Worthy of respect. But what we really need is much more safety for all, as almarst suggests.

Perhaps we've made progress since I posted MD2087: rshowalter 4/8/01 8:22am , but the concerns there remain intensely real, and the US needs to act in ways so that it does not, so often, remind other nations of tyrannosaurus rex.

The US can do better than it has done, there are words indicating that it wants to -- and for the welfare of the whole world - it has to.

larnone2 - 12:35pm May 30, 2001 EST (#4340 of 4466)

I hope the European nations will keep Bush in line. There is no need for a missile defense system other than to line the pockets of the contractors. No one is going to feel safe knowing that at the flick of a button we can destroy this planet.

As a country we need to seek betters ways of achieving peace, preserving our resources and practicing what we preach about democracy both here and abroad.

gisterme - 12:47pm May 30, 2001 EST (#4341 of 4466)

almarst wrote: "...The "butcher of the Africa" in making?..."

almarst-2001 5/29/01 10:07pm

That's a good article, almarst. It highlights the kind of problems that nobody really knows how to solve. From the article:

The United States and Britain are leading a campaign to ''demonize'' Zimbabwe's role in the Congo war and its human rights record at home, Mugabe said Tuesday at the state funeral of Defense Minister Moven Mahachi.

At the same time, those countries were condoning ''acts of genocide and gross looting of the Congo's resources'' committed by rebels and their allies: Rwanda, Uganda and Burundi, Mugabe said.

Here's the problem. On the one hand you say that it's a terrible crime for the US to interevene in a place to try to stop atrocities. On the other hand, Mugabe is claiming that the US is "condoning" atrocity because it has not intervened. Seems like a clear cut case of "damned if you do, damned if you don't".

So, almarst, do you feel that the US should be condemned as a hypocrite because it has not intervened to stop atrocity in the Congo?

almarst-2001 - 12:51pm May 30, 2001 EST (#4342 of 4466)

larnone2 5/30/01 12:35pm

I wish the same. But with very little hope for Europe.

As long as the American public will accept the role the US Administration, the CIA, the Pentagon, the military-industrial complex and the neo-colonial multinational corporations and banks are pushing down the throat of this Planet, by $ and bombs - nothing will change.

And I am very pessimistic that will happen untill some major disaster strikes and wakes up those who can sit comfortable before their TVs, excitingly watching the marvels of the precise and "smart" humanitarian bombing. Untill the "free" media stop trumpng the virtues of Globalization (read Americanization) of the World.

almarst-2001 - 12:55pm May 30, 2001 EST (#4343 of 4466)

gisterme 5/30/01 12:47pm

The US never intervenes to stop the attrocities ... unless it sees the big $ at the the end of the road.

And it very conveniently choses the "right" to side with against the "wrong", the "butcher", the "evil".

This is not just a "hypocricy". This is a calculated crime.

rshowalt - 01:00pm May 30, 2001 EST (#4344 of 4466)

It isn't that simple. And the motivations of the American people can, and often have been, good. Though I can see your bitterness.

All the same, now is a good time to consider some key points.

(122 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense