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 - 05:31pm Apr 9, 2003 EST (# 11222 of 11232)

How interesting to watch the jubilation in the streets of Baghdad! To see Saddam's monuments pulled down before the cheering throngs! Some of the scenes of joy on Iraqi people's faces (as they showered US Marines with flowers) brought to mind similar scenes from the liberation of France during WWII.

How ironic that the French now find themselves being the principal supporter of this brutal dictator. I don't think that anything the French, Germans, Russians or Chinese can say now will make the liberated Iraqi people think better of them. After all those governments' support of Saddam, no matter what they say to the new Iraqi government now, it will make them seem like hypocrites or charlatans.

It looks as if the liberation of Iraq has gone even better than I'd hoped! I appologize for being unable to visualize the real best case scenario! Isn't it a great thing when the best case scenario and reality are the same thing? I think it is.

Do you feel very smart right now, almarst? :-)

May liberated Iraq live long and prosper!

jorian319 - 05:48pm Apr 9, 2003 EST (# 11223 of 11232)

I share your elation - very reservedly, gisterme.

It is truly a joy to see our young people in uniform getting well-earned thanks and enjoying a small opportunity to share the joy of the fruit of their labors.

The French have cretienly (sp intentional) painted themselves into an uncomfortable corner, and now will probably lose all those oil contracts they had with Saddam to boot. The Germans, Russians et. al. still have their semi-credible fallbacks as rationale for their positions, but I think French credibility is toast - no pun intended.

The silence from alarmst today is deafening. I figure that by tomorrow he will have divined some of the same downside that I see coming from the current situation. Scary times lie ahead, for our people in Iraq, and for the Iraqi people.

rshow55 - 06:00pm Apr 9, 2003 EST (# 11224 of 11232)
Can we do a better job of finding truth? YES. Click "rshow55" for some things Lchic and I have done and worked for on this thread.

We have some smiles, and smiles count - especially if they last:

Come the Revolution By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/02/opinion/02FRIE.html

"To read the Arab press is to think that the entire Arab world is enraged with the U.S. invasion of Iraq, and to some extent that's true. But here's what you don't read: underneath the rage, there is also a grudging, skeptical curiosity — a curiosity about whether the Americans will actually do what they claim and build a new, more liberal Iraq.

. . .

. . .I spent this afternoon with the American studies class at Cairo University. The professor, Mohamed Kamel, summed up the mood: "In 1975, Richard Nixon came to Egypt and the government turned out huge crowds. Some Americans made fun of Nixon for this, and Nixon defended himself by saying, `You can force people to go out and welcome a foreign leader, but you can't force them to smile.' Maybe the Iraqis will eventually stop resisting you. But that will not make this war legitimate. What the U.S. needs to do is make the Iraqis smile. If you do that, people will consider this a success."

There is a lot riding on that smile, Mr. Kamel added, because this is the first "Arab-American war." This is not about Arabs and Israelis. This is about America getting inside the Arab world — not just with its power or culture, but with its ideals. It is a war for what America stands for. "If it backfires," Mr. Kamel concluded, "if you don't deliver, it will really have a big impact. People will not just say your policies are bad, but that your ideas are a fake, you don't really believe them or you don't know how to implement them."

but

Hold Your Applause By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/09/opinion/09FRIE.html

America broke Iraq; now America owns Iraq, and it owns the primary responsibility for normalizing it. If the water doesn't flow, if the food doesn't arrive, if the rains don't come and if the sun doesn't shine, it's now America's fault. We'd better get used to it, we'd better make things right, we'd better do it soon, and we'd better get all the help we can get.

If Tony Blair is given some discretion - he is "holding some cards" now - and maybe some good things could be sorted out. We have some interlocking problems:

Wizard's Chess http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/05/opinion/05SUN1.html

. Washington must simultaneously cope with three separate and potentially grave threats — from Iraq, from North Korea and from the threat of reconstituted international terrorist networks...

Russia, Germany, China, Russia, and France could help with every one of these problems - and every one of these problems ought to be soluble now. I hope Bush lets Blair "play some cards" and use political capital in ways that are useful.

France and Britain Urge Push for Mideast Peace By ELAINE SCIOLINO http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/09/international/worldspecial/09CND-EURO.html

fredmoore - 06:00pm Apr 9, 2003 EST (# 11225 of 11232)

Jorian, Gisterme ...

Be positive. NOW the UN has teeth. That is a POSITIVE. I don't believe UN delegates will dwell on past failures when future success beckons.

Cheers

(7 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense