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?

dirac_10 - 03:22pm Jun 12, 2001 EST (#4892 of 4915)

rshowalter - 03:15pm Jun 12, 2001 EST (#4890 of 4891)

Amazing how innocent those that post on the missile defense forum are. Well, I'm here to inform...

Absorbtion problems?

Not an issue. The problem is getting out of phase, caused by the same atmospheric distortions that make the stars twinkle. They have solved it with adaptive optics. The mirror's shape can be changed in thousands of places, very many times/second. A small laser paints the target and bounces back to get the info necessary.

Vibration problems with the airplane?

Not a problem.

Anybody blushing when they predict this will work?

The airplane one will be tested next year. It is only 1 megawatt. And the wavelength doesn't penetrate the atmosphere as well as the big ground based ones. But still good for many hundreds of miles.

alty53 - 03:23pm Jun 12, 2001 EST (#4893 of 4915)

To dirac 0.5.....you are absolutely correct.......exposing frauds and flim-flams can be a lot of fun........spin on, spin on

dirac_10 - 03:28pm Jun 12, 2001 EST (#4894 of 4915)

alty53 - 03:23pm Jun 12, 2001 EST (#4893 of 4893)

Well, at least you didn't claim to be an editor in a laser "trade magazine".

Your innocence is understandable. Trust me, I'm used to it.

alty53 - 03:31pm Jun 12, 2001 EST (#4895 of 4915)

To dirac 10....you are an arrogant riot.......it was fun..........later

rshowalter - 04:16pm Jun 12, 2001 EST (#4896 of 4915)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

MD3773 rshowalter 5/12/01 6:47pm

"I feel that a great deal of progress has been made since gisterme's debut . . . Especially since gisterme's MD3319 gisterme 5/4/01 11:25pm ...to which I responded in .. MD3327-3328 rshowalter 5/5/01 10:06am: ...with the citation
http://scienceforpeace.sa.utoronto.ca/WorkingGroupsPage/NucWeaponsPage/Documents/ThreatsNucWea.html THREATS TO USE NUCLEAR WEAPONS: The Sixteen Known Nuclear Crises of the Cold War, 1946-1985 by David R. Morgan

"We've come long way since - common ground is being established, differences are being clarified, thoughts and ideas are coming into focus.

"Dawn Riley and I believe that, especially with the augmented memory of the internet, controversies that could not be resolved before may be resolvable now.
MD2565: rshowalter 4/24/01 7:56pm ... MD2566: rshowalter 4/24/01 8:09pm

"We believe that controversies that could not be resolved before may be resolvable now.

"It seems to me that this thread is a step toward showing that. .

I feel that the last two months have continued that progress.

rshowalter - 05:26pm Jun 12, 2001 EST (#4897 of 4915)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Gisterme , I reread 4832 midmoon 6/12/01 9:56am , and am thinking about it.

It has interesting language:

" I think NMD is not the best solution to the problem but I also think it could be a sort of the second best answer.

" The best answer may be that the U.S. devotes herself to persuade the rouge nations to give up dangerous missile play and hopefully they are persuaded to stop the dirty play.

" This will require a cosiderable amount of perseverence for the part of the U.S.

That "best answer" sounds very good -- especially if all parties work to stand down from mutual destruction, and a general pattern of excessive threats.

Otherwise, that "best answer" can't work -- and neither can any answer I know.

We've got some work to do, backing off from the current situation, where excessive threat is the American way.

If Russia and the United States worked together to reduce world conflicts, I think that the whole world could step back from what midmoon calls, very politely "dirty play."

For that to be possible, RUSSIA has to be convinced that the new arrangements do not threaten her. And that she can have a reasonable, just place, in the new accomodations. "Peaceful coexistence" has to be real.

And just, by many standards.

Other nations have to come to feel the same.

As for the "rogues" --- a term many feel uncomfortable with-- the threat from them can be neutralized, I believe, if we can work hard to reduce the levels of fear and hatred, and neutralize some feelings for revenge that are now strong.

Sure looks possible to me. But not easy.

Because in my view. the United States would have to change.

For real - and in ways that other nations, as they are, with the past as it is, could be comfortable with for good reasons.

gisterme - 05:28pm Jun 12, 2001 EST (#4898 of 4915)

rshowalter wrote: "...that was almarst that wrote that -- do I have that wrong -- I'll check."

You're right Robert. Sorry. Almarst did write that.

(17 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense