New York Times on the Web Forums Science

Missile Defense

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.

rshow55 - 08:34am Mar 16, 2002 EST (#595 of 595)

MD401 manjumicha2001 3/12/02 12:18am says this:

"rshow:

"I think I have said it before but here it goes:

"I agree with you that NMD is a program that is 50 years old and has proven to be terminally challenged by the laws of physics. Having said that, however, I do not believe the world turns based on merits alone. Pathos (either of a nation or people) matter and more often than not, it is the driving force of the events that shape history. American people WANT TO believe that NMD works and politicans (and whatever-hypernated-complexes associated with them) will happily oblige them and make some buck in the process.....that my friend is the wheels of history. You and others' (including myself) feeble efforts are all marginal side notes to the main march.....don't you think?

Also see MD404 manjumicha2001 3/12/02 11:50am .

. . . . . . .

Europe can reasonably ask itself, and the United States, to do better than that.

If senior members of the Bush administration take this sort of position -- and they seem to be on missile defense - - how are issues of proportion to be sensibly discussed?

There are ways - though they seem to be prohibited sometimes.

In control systems for complex, interconnected circumstances, a time comes where there is no choice but to ask, and properly answer, questions of magnitude. A time comes when questions of "how much?" have to be asked and answered, if things are to work efficiently or decently.

Without a sense of proportion - without checking for facts, considering contexts, and putting things in proportion -- words, and "logic" can "justify" any muddle, disaster, crime or deception at all. The "justifying" words, taken in isolation from the things they stand for, can sound fine. http://www.subvertise.org/details.php?code=453 MD538 rshow55 3/14/02 4:05pm

Issues of responsibility become matters of proportion, too -- though it is easy for some people to dismiss such niceties. At the Nuremberg trials, again and again, the argument was made

"It was war" -- "Why play the "blame game"?-- What's done is done. http://www.subvertise.org/details.php?code=453

Sometimes, especially on matters of life and death, it is important to be clear on what was actually done. Important to expect human responsibility. Although any human action at all can be dismissed from view according to the logic of the last lines of MD 552mazza9 3/14/02 9:52pm

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense