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?
Read Debates, a
new Web-only feature culled from Readers' Opinions, published every
Thursday.
(149 previous messages)
rshow55
- 10:15am Mar 3, 2002 EST (#150
of 153)
One big story, and set of strange facts, involves proportion -
and is well set out in OpEd today. How did we get into such
strange circumstances?
The Uses of American Power http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/03/opinion/03SUN1.html
" If Congress cranks up the Pentagon's budget
as much as President Bush would like, the United States will soon
be spending more on defense than all the other countries of the
world combined. That is just one measure of America's armed might
— and a global imbalance of power the likes of which has probably
not been seen since the height of the Roman empire. While the
United States is used to regarding itself as a global power, and
its status as the sole superpower has steadily grown since the
collapse of the Soviet Union, the overwhelming disparity is still
a big change . . ."
Wall of Ideas By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
"I 've spent the last six weeks traveling around
the Arab-Muslim world, talking with people about Sept. 11 and
U.S.-Muslim relations. So I didn't know whether to laugh or cry
when I got home and read that the Pentagon was considering putting
out false stories that might advance America's antiterrorism
campaign. I didn't know whether to laugh or cry because if you
spend five minutes in the Arab-Muslim world these days, you'll
instantly discover that people there don't believe us when we tell
the truth"
rshow55
- 10:18am Mar 3, 2002 EST (#151
of 153)
lchic
3/3/02 10:06am of course, there can be many stories based on the
same "facts" - but as more facts get connected -- and the more
connections get drawn, interpreted, and crosschecked -- the number
of consistent stories shrinks. Usually shrinks enough that
people who have to cooperate can agree on enough so that cooperation
is possible -- whether they are fully agreed in their stories or
not. They come to agree on what matters to their interaction
together.
rshow55
- 10:56am Mar 3, 2002 EST (#152
of 153)
I think lchic - is profoundly right in her remarks about the need
for dramatic presentation, for patterns that can be made to fit into
people's head.
The 'truth' of the past half century might be a
'new-to-you' as yet unrevealed pattern. Truth patterns might play
out and 'fit' into minds more easily than the 'pattern of lies'
that has been put out as 'dis-information' over past years.
Of course CONGRESS could have a hearing into the
matter .. or .. simply remove much funding from missile production
and upkeep ... redeploying redundant minds towards more useful
humanitarian work.
But for that to happen, voters would have to understand patterns
where there has been much effort, over half a century, to conceal
and muddle some fundamentals.
Movie - script - making it 'work' http://www.writersconference.com/crew/progmain.html
An illustrated script of Casablanca http://www.edict.com.hk/movies/casablanca/casablanca1.htm
Casablanca is common ground, something culturally literate
Americans know -- and that people the whole world over understand,
at the level of sympathy, and intellectually, too. I used the movie
as a point of departure in PSYCHWAR, CASABLANCA, AND TERROR ,
which tells a key story about the Cold War, interesting to American,
Russians, and others. http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7a163/0
Especially the core story part, from posting 13 http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7a163/12
to posting 23 http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7a163/22
There is a comment in #26 that I feel some may find interesting, as
well...
A fairly compact ongoing summary of this thread from September
25, 2000 to date, which is too large for easy reading, but not for
sampling, is set out with many links in Psychwar, Casablanca, and
Terror -- from #151 on... http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7a163/159
It involves many links that no longer work, but a good deal of
information on what has happened on this thread, as well.
PSYCHWAR, CASABLANCA, AND TERROR sets out basic mechanisms
of how psychological injury happens. It deals with patterns of
psychological warfare that are still ongoing -- where lies are
weapons. A key point is how psychologically injurious, and
devastating, the psychological injury associated with deception can
be.
The lies of "missile defense" persist because they are part of a
tradition of psychological warfare - - and in psychological warfare,
mistakes aren't corrected so that mutual cooperation and good
decisions can occur. Lies are defended, so that progress and good
decisions can be prevented. In that defense, diversion, distraction,
and avoidance of fundamentals are the watchwords.
(1
following message)
New York Times on the Web Forums
Science
Missile Defense
|