New York Times Readers Opinions
The New York Times

Home
Job Market
Real Estate
Automobiles
News
International
National
Washington
Business
Technology
Science
Health
Sports
New York Region
Education
Weather
Obituaries
NYT Front Page
Corrections
Opinion
Editorials/Op-Ed
Readers' Opinions


Features
Arts
Books
Movies
Travel
Dining & Wine
Home & Garden
Fashion & Style
Crossword/Games
Cartoons
Magazine
Week in Review
Multimedia
College
Learning Network
Services
Archive
Classifieds
Book a Trip
Personals
Theater Tickets
Premium Products
NYT Store
NYT Mobile
E-Cards & More
About NYTDigital
Jobs at NYTDigital
Online Media Kit
Our Advertisers
Member_Center
Your Profile
E-Mail Preferences
News Tracker
Premium Account
Site Help
Privacy Policy
Newspaper
Home Delivery
Customer Service
Electronic Edition
Media Kit
Community Affairs
Text Version
TipsGo to Advanced Search
Search Options divide
go to Member Center Log Out
  

 [F] 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.


Earliest Messages Previous Messages Recent Messages Outline (12173 previous messages)

lchic - 07:16pm May 29, 2003 EST (# 12174 of 12209)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

People want

  • clean air
  • fresh food
  • clean water
  • shelter
  • ENERGY - to oil the wheels of industry

lchic - 07:18pm May 29, 2003 EST (# 12175 of 12209)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

People don't want

  • chaos
  • war
  • hunger
  • thirst
  • unemployment
  • insufficient resources to enable a decent life

    jorian319 - 07:23pm May 29, 2003 EST (# 12176 of 12209)

    ~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

    People don't want

    chaos

    war

    hunger

    thirst

    unemployment

    insufficient resources to enable a decent life

    No. Really? How about:

  • bad television

  • unreliable cars

  • slow internet service

  • Frozen "diet" dinners that cost more because they have less food in them.

    lchic - 07:31pm May 29, 2003 EST (# 12177 of 12209)
    ~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

    Showalter is saying

    • Political Strategists saw world deficits
    • Identified problems
    • Selected human resources to work for solutions
    What was happening then and still now is that there were 'advanced economies' and deficit economies.

    A question i've put is

    - Why if the Nations, with poverty and high unemployment, have access to all modern knowledge and processes ... why can't they implement this within their system.

    WHY ISN'T THIS HAPPENING

    why aren't the gaps between the HAVEs and HAVEnots lessening

    A part of this explanation Showalter would say is lack of access to cheap ENERGY

    so if ENERGY is the key

    why aren't the empathetic advanced nations working towards the provision of affordable energy for all to give everyone a decent and acceptable standard of living

      If the gap between the Arab-non-funtioning world and the Advanced world were closed ... perhaps their hearty cheers for the negativism of terrorist actions might move towards positive_rationality.
    The more interconnected the world

    The greater the SEEN need to keep it knitted together rather than unravel it

    __________

    jorian319 - 07:35pm May 29, 2003 EST (# 12178 of 12209)

    Lou - Spot on, IMHO.

    Robert:

    Jorian319 , I think you should be ashamed of yourself - and the people who trust you and respect you . . . maybe shouldn't.

    What makes you think anyone trusts me or respects me? Maybe MY duty is to be irreverent, and provide the opportunity for fresh air to some who's stuffed shirts might otherwise prohibit.

    Those who trust and respect me (yes, there are some) have their reasons, not based in faith, nor in words, but in consistency of deeds performed. I wouldn't have it any other way. I sure wouldn't want trust and respect to depend on your endorsement.

    lchic - 07:37pm May 29, 2003 EST (# 12179 of 12209)
    ~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

    Jorian if you purport to represent the CIA note the central letter 'intelligence'

    why not display some

    if you are representative of that body then The American Parliament should take it down and re-model it

    hire a few 'brains' with the added attribution of 'common sense'

    Ask yourself - are you worth your pay - the answer is no

    do the decent thing --- walk!

    _____________________

    More Messages Recent Messages (30 following messages)

     Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
     Your Preferences

     [F] New York Times on the Web Forums  / Science  / Missile Defense