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 (12299 previous messages)

rshow55 - 11:16am Jun 4, 2003 EST (# 12300 of 12312)
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.

If the staffed organizations of nation states were to read these summaries of my work on this thread from its beginning, with a "willing suspension of disbelief" about my involvement with Eisenhower they might give the postings more weight - though the arguments wouldn't change all. And the extent of the work, by lchic , the NYT, and other posters would not change at all.

9002 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.3h27bpgidAu.0@.f28e622/10529

9003 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.3h27bpgidAu.0@.f28e622/10530

9004 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.3h27bpgidAu.0@.f28e622/10531

9005 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.3h27bpgidAu.0@.f28e622/10532

9006 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.3h27bpgidAu.0@.f28e622/10533

9007 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.3h27bpgidAu.0@.f28e622/10534

9008 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.3h27bpgidAu.0@.f28e622/10535

set out summaries of work done here prior to March, 2001.

I'd like a chance to brief someone in Vladimir Putin's government - on the record, face to face - and respond to specific questions related in the "briefing" below. I should be able to do so, and do similar things, without violating any reasonable security laws at all. The "briefing" below might serve as a sample of my work product, and the subjects I'd like to discuss.

9009 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.3h27bpgidAu.0@.f28e622/10536

9010 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.3h27bpgidAu.0@.f28e622/10537

9011 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.3h27bpgidAu.0@.f28e622/10538

9012 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.3h27bpgidAu.0@.f28e622/10539

I set out to do jobs where my own power would be limited - in some ways, nonexistent. But the assumption was that I would be able to communicate effectively with power.

And I was encouraged to do things. I was assigned projects. Every single thing I was assigned to do required some essential support from a nation state in two ways.

First of all, they all involved such complex cooperation that they were fragile - they could be stopped with "a few well placed phone calls."

Secondly, they all involved such complex cooperation that occasionally, the idea that the government wanted the work done had to be conveyed.

I have been working very hard to present technical proposals to the US government - so that I can hope to get the essential support described above. I've been rebuffed. It is reasonable - submitting to censorship on issues that are reasonably classified - for me to ask for assistance from firms with connections with other nation states - including Germany and France. I need to be able to work. The nation owes me that, at least.

almarst2002 - 12:28pm Jun 4, 2003 EST (# 12301 of 12312)

This right, however, entails a corresponding duty: to respect the right of others.''

What a novel idea for the "civilized" christian West to accept. Are you saying I can't bomb those NON-ENGLISH-SPEAKING BARBARIANS?

Well, NOT SO FAST...

U.S. Seeks Ability to 'Take Down' N. Korea Quickly - http://asia.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=2861552

After all, WHAT IS N.KOREA? Its just a dot on a map most Americans wouldn't notice if disapeared with all its population from the face of the Anglo-Saxon recognised World.

almarst2002 - 12:34pm Jun 4, 2003 EST (# 12302 of 12312)

Iraqis not ready for democracy, says Blair's envoy - http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,5944-701135,00.html

WE WILL PATIENTLY WAIT... AS LONG AS THEY HAVE OIL.

almarst2002 - 12:45pm Jun 4, 2003 EST (# 12303 of 12312)

U.S. to Lay Off 500,000 in Iraq - http://www.latimes.com/la-fg-econ3jun03,0,1223877.story

Lessons:

1. SUVIVING THE BOMBS DOES NOT MAKE YOU ELIGIBLE FOR LIFE, ACCORDNING TO THE LAW OF $LORD$!

2. UNLIKE A SINGLE MESSAGE BY A MILITARY DICTATORSHIP, THE MARKET DEMOKRACY GIVES YOU A CHOICE OF TWO - ONE ON EACH SIDE OF A $$$ BILL.

More Messages Recent Messages (9 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

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