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 - 08:55am Mar 18, 2002 EST (#662 of 668)

almarst-2001 3/17/02 11:06pm includes this:

The cycle has to be breaked. Only the strongest side of the conflict can afford to say sorry first.

Almarst is right, I think. There is a big problem - and to some degree, it is going to have to be resolved by force (for this, nonviolent force, from people with power and position, would do.)

In the 1988 presidential election campaign, George Bush Sr. was asked about "an American naval blunder in the Persian Gulf (the shooting down of an Iranian airliner and the abrupt murder of its 242 passangers) . . . . He refused to answer on the ground that he would "never, never apologize for the United States of America . . . I don't care what the facts are."

Source: Lapham's Rules of Influence by Lewis Lapham, Random House 1999 Introduction,xxvii

George Bush Sr, president and father of the current president, former head of the CIA and diplomat, was expressing some de facto United States "establishment" doctrine.

How many mistakes, muddles, costs, and tragedies are made possible or inevitable by such a doctrine, used in action by Americans, and also by actors representing many, many other nations?

If this pattern were effectively challenged, in cases where results mattered enough, a great deal might change.

. . . .

What might an effective apology for our shooting down of the airliner have done to our relations with Iran?

Facts have to be established, and emphasized, not "brushed off" -- if workable human relations are to be possible -- and the facts are important enough. Apology may not always be necessary -- but it is frequently (putting the matter gently) an "option to consider."

lchic - 09:23am Mar 18, 2002 EST (#663 of 668)

The American Inquisition.

rshow55 - 09:34am Mar 18, 2002 EST (#664 of 668)

Lunarchic cited a nonviolent but important kind of warfare (that the US, and countries in complex interaction with the US, might well consider, both defensively and offensively)last year.

Marketing Brand Warfare: 10 Rules for Building the Killer Brand by David F. D'Alessandro and Michele Owens McGraw-Hill, 2001 ~ Stock your arsenal with brand weaponry

Leadership, Strategy & Competition How to Compete Like a Judo Strategist ! Movement, balance, and leverage: Savvy executives use these principles to compete every day. In this excerpt from their new book Judo Strategy: Turning Your Competitors' Strength to Your Advantage, HBS professor David B. Yoffie and research associate Mary Kwak reveal five techniques of the masters.

It isn't wise for a nation state to become identified with lying. That's a source of leverage -- but a motivation for "disinformation disarmament" as well. Lies are unstable.

Nor is it wise for a nation state to become identified with absolutely merciless bullying.

If the United States had thought to set out an "advertising campaign" to alienate lots of the world -- they'd be doing many of the things they're doing now.

mazza9 - 09:47am Mar 18, 2002 EST (#665 of 668)
Louis Mazza

The Iranian airliner crew was culpable in its shoot down. There are international "rules of the road" regarding air operations in a declared war zone. The aircraft did not follow the rules and as such was deemed a hazard.

911 proves once again that there are people who choose to ignore the rules and use this to their advantage.

For people who espouse an anti missile defense posture you all seem ready to use force,

"Almarst is right, I think. There is a big problem - and to some degree, it is going to have to be resolved by force (for this, nonviolent force, from people with power and position, would do.)"

You're no different than the people you disparage. Only, somehow your force is okay because your hearts are pure. Give me a break. I'm sure the little girl who was grenaded at a church service must realize that her attackers were pure of heart and therefore her death is okay!

Yeah, just like the triumphant pre hominid in the movie 2001 you are ready to kill to achieve your goals.

LouMazza

rshow55 - 10:20am Mar 18, 2002 EST (#666 of 668)

This describes force -- that is not killing. MD656 rshow55 3/17/02 8:24pm .

If, for peace, we have to wait for "pure hearts" -- we'll wait forever. But we can do better than follow your examples, Mazza.

(2 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense