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 - 07:50pm Mar 19, 2002 EST (#692 of 715)

Maybe "hilarious" isn't quite the word - but laughter, pain, and disgust are close.

This is clear - - if "rational discourse" and "eloquence" and "warm hearts" could have solved the world's problems - especially the problems about war - they would have long ago.

The "rational" parts may be fairly well "understood" -- the irrational parts aren't.

But one issue (Mazza will understand this - though I notice he jumped to the idea of "killing" when I used the word "force") is that - for getting certain things settled, force matters.

And, with human beings as they are, there are times when there has to be a fight.

manjumicha2001 3/19/02 7:01pm , you're right when you say:

"What excites him is force capabilities, not moral sensibilities, which he has been trained all his life to think of as a luxury the true warriers can't afford to have. So, no matter how much "outrage" you guys express at his cool, matter of fact, statements, it just doesn't register in his brain as an important issue, don't you get it?"

I get it - - - but if you classify moral sensibilities out of existence -- you really are at the level of Thomas Hobbes.

There needs to be a fight about some technical facts - - because lying to allies is a big deal in the military, and we've done plenty of it. And a fight about whether murder matters, as well.

For quite practical reasons.

The NUCLEAR THREAT INITIATIVE , which is largely dominated by CSIS types who are not sentimentalists, has a MISSION STATEMENT. Their mission is

" “To strengthen global security by reducing the risk of use and preventing the spread of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction. We will also work to build the trust, transparency, and security which are preconditions to the ultimate fulfillment of the Nonproliferation Treaty's goals and ambitions.”

Now, subject to Mazza's usages -- how do you ever build trust, transparency, and security for the human beings involved? Some things have to change.

mazza9 - 07:57pm Mar 19, 2002 EST (#693 of 715)
Louis Mazza

manjumicha:

The shoot down of KAL 007 was directed by the leaders in Moscow. Yes, it was a military/political decision on their part.

The Iranian airliner was a military decision taken in a wartime setting under wartime conditions. The Vincennes had been fired upon and was conducting operations where Iraqi force had been directed against oil tankers which are "civilian" targets. We all know that the rules of war were often ignored by Saddam. Remember the use of chemical weapons on the Kurds of Northern Iraq? Or how about the extreme environmental attack on the entire world when he torched the Kuwait oil fields?

I don't own a gun, haven't fired one since my military days when we were required to take training once a year, (1973).

I have a degree in History and find that military mannerisms are replete throughout recorded history, so in that case I don't believe my perspective is unique. This is a forum on Missile Defense which is a military as well as technical and political issue.

My name is Louis and if you cannot find it in your repetoire to be polite well, I suppose you just didn't get proper upbringing and we can blame your parents can't we. My grandmother was the typical Italian Grandma, with a wooden spoon, and she expected that my behavior be polite at all times. She counseled that name calling and swearing were the most heinous behaviors because they caused the most personnal harm.

I guess you can call my last paragraph a "missive defense"

Louis Mazza

rshow55 - 08:16pm Mar 19, 2002 EST (#694 of 715)

manjumicha2001 3/19/02 7:01pm . . . "Sadly fear of G-D ain't gonna cut it for these guys, notwithstanding occasional Sunday outings....:-) "

That was true of the Enron crowd, as well - - but things did eventually turn around -- and there was an avalanche .

With human beings as they are, there are times when there has to be a fight.

Is it possible to "beat up" on the military-industrial complex? They've told so many lies, and are so deep in fraud - in so many ways - that with some people with real power involved -- it might be possible to do a real "military" number on them.

The classic pattern of military force, as Aristotle taught Alexander, is still valid today:

"Set 'em up, where they cannot run away, and kill them to the last man."

At the level of accounting, something like that happened to Enron -- and maybe, by 'an by -- to Anderson.

At a level where there are real consequences it may be possible with repect to the folks who love nukes, and the MD fraud, as well.

We'll see. I've had some whiffs of hope.

. . .

I don't happen to be a pacifist, either. But things ought to be sanely enough arranged so that we avoid the destruction of the world - - avoid endless conflict - - and spend our money in less boring, more beautiful ways. After a while, lies are boring.

lchic - 10:00pm Mar 19, 2002 EST (#695 of 715)

Diversion Diversion above ... the major point above is that mAzzA has to give way to his wonderful daughter whose internet needs and potentials fully exceed his. The kid keeps the 'parent in line' ... wait till she comes home one day to inform him on the true state of our world! There's always 'hope' via the future generation.

Further to my last post lchic 3/19/02 12:17am the spotlight has moved from Cuba to the Antartic where a chunk of ice the size of WALES has broken off the Southern Continent .. it next broke down to ONE THOUSAND Iceburgs ... http://www.guardian.co.uk/globalwarming/story/0,7369,670456,00.html

There's a term GLOBAL WARMING .. coming to a low lying spot near you soon in the form of a rise in sea level ... never live ON the Bay .. always higher and look down.

Kyoto:

"Interesting how the US doesn't want to limit those emissions that create global warming!

(20 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense