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 (12325 previous messages)

almarst2002 - 06:14pm Jun 5, 2003 EST (# 12326 of 12342)

At the time of the first Persian Gulf War (1991), the United States’ military planners knew that Iraq’s water supply facilities were vulnerable to sanctions. They were also aware that Iraq’s vulnerability, owing to the lack of crucial imports of chemicals and equipment required for the purification of water, could cause deaths, diseases and epidemics. Yet planners went ahead with the imposition of sanctions that directly contributed to degrading Iraq’s water treatment facilities. The sanctions caused public health catastrophes, exactly as the planners had reasonably conjectured and anticipated in the planning documents dating from 1991. Declassified US government documents disclose planners’ complicity, foreknowledge and malfeasance in exploiting Iraq’s vulnerability in supplying clean water to its population.

http://www.pressaction.com/pablog/archives/000990.html

THE ANGLO-SAXON VERSION OF HUMANITY.

almarst2002 - 06:23pm Jun 5, 2003 EST (# 12327 of 12342)

News Sources Not in Bed with the U.S. Regime - http://www.pressaction.com/pablog/archives/000957.html#000957

Here are some links to the best sites on the web where you can get unfiltered information on the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

Kurt Nimmo (Nimmo’s website, Another Day in the Empire, is providing great coverage of the U.S. invasion of Iraq. His mix of analysis, links and photos is a valuable resource, one that is so vital as the establishment media becomes even more irrational.)

CounterPunch (Jeffrey St. Clair and Alexander Cockburn are publishing several articles a day on the events in Iraq that you won’t find in the U.S. establishment press.)

Electronic Iraq (Updates from the site of the U.S. terrorist attacks, plus editorials and a newswire on all things related to the invasion.)

IndyMedia (Great resource. Newswire is the most valuable.)

Yellow Times (When not censored by its web host, Yellow Times is providing excellent coverage of news that the U.S. establishment media is afraid to run.)

Al Jazeera (When not hacked by those opposed to free speech, Al Jazeera’s new English-language website provides the most balanced news coverage from the frontlines of the invasion.)

AntiWar.com (Links to articles about the U.S. invasion of Iraq.)

IraqJournal.org (News project working in conjunction with radio show Democracy Now! to offer a comprehensive alternative to establishment media.)

Abu Spinoza’s Iraq Resources (List of resources on Iraq that can help to refute the claims of the war party. Compiled by Press Action contributor Abu Spinoza.)

Stand Down (The left-right blog opposing an invasion of Iraq.)

The Muslim Association of Britain (News site of British Islamic group.)

Rense.com ( "World's Most Revealing News Service")

IraqWar.Ru (Analytical center was created recently by a group of journalists and military experts from Russia to provide accurate and up-to-date news and analysis of the war against Iraq.)

War In Iraq ("Project was created for providing timely and unbiased coverage of the war in Iraq and related events. The primary objective of this project is to offer an independent view of the situation, a view which is not dominated by corporate interests, national agendas or political ideologies.")

Dissident Voice ("Forget CNN, FOX and the other Pentagon lapdogs. Our regularly updated compilation of news articles from around the internet gives you a more realistic picture of Gulf Slaughter II.")

almarst2002 - 06:32pm Jun 5, 2003 EST (# 12328 of 12342)

On April 8, the U.S. military killed three journalists in Baghdad:

Tariq Ayyoub, Jordanian journalist for Al-Jazeera

Taras Protsyuk, a Ukrainian television cameraman for Reuters

Jose Couso, cameraman for Spanish television network Telecinco

U.S. Invasion Force Targets Reporters - http://www.pressaction.com/pablog/archives/000977.html#000977

... TO PROVIDE A LIVING AND BREATHING SPACE TO THE "ONLY" MEDIA SEEN AS FIT TO EXISTS:

(US) Media coverage of Operation Iraqi Freedom (sic) has been about as pathetic as expected. Distortion, spin, and outright lies rule the day. However, outside the reports being generated by journalists in bed, I mean, embedded with the military, the corporate media continues to churn out its steady dose of pro-intervention propaganda.

Two New York Times articles on March 29, 2003 struck me as useful examples.

Edward Rothstein penned a piece called "Churchill, Heroic Relic or Relevant Now?" that began with a reference to Winston Churchill "regularly warning a complacent British Parliament about the imminent threat of German rearmament."

The media just can't enough of the "appeasement" myth. - http://www.pressaction.com/pablog/archives/000964.html#000964

almarst2002 - 06:42pm Jun 5, 2003 EST (# 12329 of 12342)

Bush says he'll 'reveal the truth' on Iraqi WMD - http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/06/05/sprj.irq.wmd.controversy/index.html

More Messages Recent Messages (13 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

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