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 - 11:28pm Jun 10, 2001 EST (#4727 of 4736)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

We need to remember the context in which proposals and promises are happening.

And the history involved is ugly - - in terms of what the US has done, and what it has condoned, and permitted. THREATS TO USE NUCLEAR WEAPONS: The Sixteen Known Nuclear Crises of the Cold War, 1946-1985 by David R. Morgan http://scienceforpeace.sa.utoronto.ca/WorkingGroupsPage/NucWeaponsPage/Documents/ThreatsNucWea.html

The NAZI influence on US policy cannot now be reasonably doubted. And its connection to nuclear policy seems clear. CIA's Worst-Kept Secret by Martin A. Lee May 16, 2001 http://www.consortiumnews.com/051601a.html

Morover, when one searches the connection between the Bush family, and the Nazis, going back to before WWII, and involving a government investigation and, quite likely, the transplanting of a prominant family from Connecticut to Texas, and views this in terms of the fact that George Bush Sr. was nominated and confirmed as director of the CIA - - there is reason for representatives of other nation states to ask for verifiable assurance about US actions and capabilities, and not to rely on "blind faith." MD4701 rshowalter 6/10/01 5:07pm . . . MD4675 rshowalter 6/9/01 8:16pm

MD4693 rshowalter 6/10/01 1:08pm

rshowalter - 11:36pm Jun 10, 2001 EST (#4728 of 4736)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

From Rumsfeld Calls on Europe to Rethink Arms Control by JAMES DAO http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/11/world/11RUMS.html

" Asked if Mr. Ivanov was correct in suggesting that the entire structure of arms control might collapse if the ABM treaty was scrapped, Mr. Rumsfeld said he did not know."

He should know.

dirac_10 - 11:52pm Jun 10, 2001 EST (#4729 of 4736)

gdecatrel - 08:54pm Jun 10, 2001 EST (#4721 of 4725)

there's no point to missile defense . . .

This outta be good.

if you were saddam, wouldn't you just put the bomb on a u.s. bound oil tanker, container ship, or a foreign commercial airline?

It sure wouldn't be my first choice. I'd have to order someone to do it. Others would know. Plenty of defectors in the past. Including in the family. Takes a special kind of person to help start WWIII. And you could under-estimate our technical ability to sense such things. Certainly something worth spending money on. And you wouldn't tell everyone all your tricks. And of course, it would be a big heavy thing, not a suitcase on a jet.

So, it would be a very nervous time for Saddam as he gave the orders to put one on a boat. Sending something like that, if discovered, would cause a hard rain to fall. (And a rather no-nonsense inspection regime in various places here and there.)

Much easier to just have the scientists build him a button to push. Scientists will cheerfully do that ("It isn't science that is at fault, it's the humans.")

Not to mention that we can't rule out technical bugs in Saddam's and all the other dictator's missles. Could have an accidental launch. Or Saddam could somehow trigger a launch from Iran and get them plastered. No one would know the truth after it was gone. Saddam would get out of his box, and Los Angeles would disappear.

Will we catch him ahead of time if he puts one on a boat? Maybe, maybe not. Will we be able to shoot down a missle he launched? Probably.

If we can't do either? If the world will have large numbers of dictators that can destroy us all? Then the human race, is probably doomed, so spending the money won't matter.

All we're doing here is buying a couple decades, maybe things will work out by then.

I think the planners under-estimate the enemy's creativity.

I think you underestimate our technical ability if we spend real money.

I think the solution is to stop bullying other nations. The only reason we have enemies is our hypocritical, naive, and bombastic foreign policies.

There have been predatory thugs, with no morality, in abundance, since before farming. The United States of America did not create them. And we've been doing a lot better in the bullying department since the end of the Cold War.

by the way, here's another thought to ponder: the a-bomb is 1940's technology. it's inevitable that their construction will be commonplace.

Ain't science swell.

dirac_10 - 12:02am Jun 11, 2001 EST (#4730 of 4736)

11111zbl - 10:20pm Jun 10, 2001 EST (#4722 of 4729)

NMD is not a cost effective defense. Read the recent Foriegn Policy magazine:

Cost effective? A small percentage of our military budget with the chance of stopping WWIII?

Russian nuclear scientists make $50 a month

Soros sends them money. GW is cutting off the money. And lately Soros is threatening pulling out.

We are going to put them back to work, making a buck, working on missle defense.

Many would work for whoever was willingly to pay them (Iraq, Bin Ladden?)

Well, science isn't evil, it's only the people involved. They are just doing science.

Bush has even moved to cut aid to Russia. This included aid to keep nuclear scientists busy dismantling the nuclear aresenal.

Talk about stupid.

Missile defense may or may not work, but it will be EXPENSIVE.

Cheap at any price. And a small percentage of our military budget.

Russian nuclear scientists looking for cash are much scarier to me.

Sure gives me the willies. To bad about GW. But it is mostly a threat to cut the funding. He has pretty much fallen in line doing everything Bill Clinton did. The Balkans, China, N. Korea. It's just politics.

It is time for a return to rational thinking in our defence policy making

Paying for the scientists is chicken feed. Costs nothing. Not an either/or.

(6 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense