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.

gisterme - 02:15am Mar 16, 2003 EST (# 10054 of 10056)

almarst2003 - 01:22am Mar 16, 2003 EST (# 10047 of ...) http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.x1zsatUD52D.2134496@52c4e0@.f28e622/11592

"...I wonder what would happen if China says "NO" at SC. Would it mean US consumers would rather walk naked on the streets? And what about Germany? Are you suggesting to drop all those fine German cars on a side of a road and jump into a Ford's "Crown Victorias"?:)..."

Heh heh. Don't underestimate the power of US consumers, almarst. American trade unions would be absolutely delighted to see those things happen, not to mention the American automobile manufacturers.

By developing and "handing off" certain industries to foreign firms and/or labor since WWII, US companies have shared our prosperity in a free-market sort of way, much to the chagrin of labor organizations here at home. This is true of many innovative industires from textiles and apparal to consumer electronics.

I really don't expect much backlash against anybody except France though, with possibly a little against Germany.

Nobody here expects much cooperation from China and most Americans want to see China's economy and trade improve since they're not trying to impose their form of government on others nor are they threatening anybody and now seem to genuinly want to improve the lot of their people.

Russia doesn't yet offer much in the way of consumer products here yet so they're the least vulnerable to the wrath of the American wallet.

The reason that things might be worse for France than the others is that the French government is perceived by most Americans as being arrogant and ungrateful and as having an active agenda that is generally anti-US. The same can't be said of the others including China.

Americans generally don't like the idea that France is so strongly supporting a bloody tyrant either. That sort of runs counter our sense of support for doing the right thing. Americans don't want to see the kids in Iraq starving like the French government apparantly does.

gisterme - 02:19am Mar 16, 2003 EST (# 10055 of 10056)

"The promise of excellent cuisine is not what wins wars."

"I thought it was a main goal to win wars:)"

'Could be a secret weapon. :-) If it's important enough and it matters enough, Robert should check. Maybe not. He's easily frightened.

I'm feeling hopeful anyway.

gisterme - 02:32am Mar 16, 2003 EST (# 10056 of 10056)

almarst2003 - 01:45am Mar 16, 2003 EST (# 10052 of ...) http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.x1zsatUD52D.2134496@.f28e622/11597

"Some fools would argue that "international opinion" is very importand for the safety of the American people:)"

Your observation is good almarst. Only fools would want to argue that "internation opinion" is important when it tends to support a threat against themselves.

However, "international opinion" is not as dead-set against the US/UK and Spain as say, France, would want us to believe. :-)

I still wonder why Chriac suddenly loves Saddam so much? Has he been dealing with the devil? Does he see his debt coming due? Gotta wonder.

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense