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 - 03:33pm May 15, 2003 EST (# 11686 of 11713)
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.

gisterme's http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.o3LeaD1s9bU.722968@.f28e622/13292 cites 11414 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.o3LeaD1s9bU.722968@.f28e622/12992 and makes a point I think is important.

"I don't think we should allow ourselves to be subjected to nuclear extortion."

But how, effectively, are we to avoid it? I agree that it is important that we avoid it, to the extent we can, in the situation we're actually in.

I'd be for a combination of economic pressure - diplomatic pressure - and any interdiction options that made real sense.

At the same time, I'd be for using US resources to make sure that the N. Korean population knew some key facts about their situation - in ways that would have a reasonable chance of standing up to scrutiny. Jamming the messages onto all of N. Korea's (antiquated) communication channels, or many of them, ought not to be that difficult. It would surely be justified.

At the same time, I still think it reasonable to say of N. Korea that

"...If this dangerous vestige of the Cold War can be dealt with and healed, the world will be a better, safer place. This is a situation where the US must be careful, but can also afford to be decent, and even generous..."

If we cut a deal with N. Korea that works for both sides - it has to be one that actually works.

If we can't - I'd be for blockade and/or interdiction - of nuclear facilities and leadership - if we could actually make it work.

Personally, if I could just snap my fingers and kill the top 2000 leaders in N. Korea, and at the same time knock out all their offensive capacity . . . I'd snap my fingers. Most Americans would, I think. Remembering the Golden Rule, and what the N. Koreans say they want to do to us, that seems fair enough. But life isn't that simple, is it?

Since it isn't that simple, we might well talk to the N. Koreans. They're afraid of us, with good reason - and we're afraid of them, also for some good reasons. Maybe some arrangement less crazy than the current one can be arranged.

If it can't - I certainly wouldn't rule out military force as a matter of morality or principle - if it can be made to work.

lchic - 03:58pm May 15, 2003 EST (# 11687 of 11713)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

China's tourism has collapsed creating vast numbers of unemployed - the labour ratio is 20times per tourist to that of Hong Kong - whose tourism has also collapsed.

China is hostess of 'The 2008 O-Games' ... how 'safe' a zone does it seem with SARS, and luney-tune North Korea blowing steam to its North East?

How much pressure is China putting on NK to get it into line?

That's the 'line of human decency'!

lchic - 04:11pm May 15, 2003 EST (# 11688 of 11713)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

. ¦³¿ú¯à¨Ï°­±À¿i If you have money you can make the ghosts and devils turn your grind stone. http://www.openface.ca/~dstephen/chprov.htm

rshow55 - 04:13pm May 15, 2003 EST (# 11689 of 11713)
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 need better definitions of "human decency" - more widely agreed - than we have now.

They'd converge, if the checking of facts were, in some effective way, forced by institutions or effective moral suasion - in cases where consequences matter enough.

We're a long way from that, now.

Right now (this is a point that has concerned almarst ) there is no effective social contract between people - no minimal standard of "human decency."

For such a standard to converge, and get the solidity it needs - there have to be effective constraints on the right to lie (or the right to evade checking) that don't exist today.

Reliably enforced. That doesn't even exist within the New York Times organization - and I suspect standards there are much higher than average.

Getting effective controls on the right to lie - and effective checking when it matters enough - doesn't look so hard to get - but it is necessary.

If China and N. Korea could really talk straight to each other (and each could talk straight to Russia) a lot could sort out.

A lot else could sort out, too.

(24 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense