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 - 08:56am Jun 8, 2003 EST (# 12396 of 12402)
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.

The lead editorial today , Was the Intelligence Cooked? http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/08/opinion/08SUN1.html starts:

" The latest vogue in Washington is the proposition that it really doesn't matter whether Saddam Hussein maintained an arsenal of unconventional weapons in recent years. American troops may not have uncovered any evidence of the weapons of mass destruction the Bush administration was warning about, the argument goes. But they have found plenty of proof that Iraq suffered under a brutal dictator who slaughtered thousands, perhaps tens or hundreds of thousands of his own people, and that is reason enough to justify the invasion. We disagree. We are as pleased as anyone to see Saddam Hussein removed from power, but the United States cannot now simply erase from the record the Bush administration's dire warnings about the Iraqi weapons threat. The good word of the United States is too central to America's leadership abroad — and to President Bush's dubious doctrine of pre-emptive warfare — to be treated so cavalierly.

10956 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.oaClbDb0e5g.878826@.f28e622/12506 includes this:

The Wolf Who Cried Wolf in Sheep's Clothing By William Saletan Updated Tuesday, April 1, 2003, at 2:53 PM PT http://slate.msn.com/id/2080889/

"Let's consult the expert, Aesop. In the Wolf in Sheep's Clothing http://www.bartleby.com/17/1/39.html , he wrote:

"A wolf found great difficulty in getting at the sheep owing to the vigilance of the shepherd and his dogs. But one day it found the skin of a sheep that had been flayed and thrown aside, so it put it on over its own pelt and strolled down among the sheep. The lamb that belonged to the sheep, whose skin the wolf was wearing, began to follow the wolf in the sheep's clothing; so, leading the lamb a little apart, he soon made a meal off her, and for some time he succeeded in deceiving the sheep, and enjoying hearty meals.

"In the Boy Who Cried Wolf http://classics.mit.edu/Aesop/fab.1.1.html , Aesop told a different tale:

"A shepherd-boy, who watched a flock of sheep near a village, brought out the villagers three or four times by crying out, "Wolf! Wolf!" and when his neighbors came to help him, laughed at them for their pains. The wolf, however, did truly come at last. The shepherd-boy, now really alarmed, shouted in an agony of terror: "Pray, do come and help me; the wolf is killing the sheep"; but no one paid any heed to his cries, nor rendered any assistance. The wolf, having no cause of fear, at his leisure lacerated or destroyed the whole flock.

"Separately, each fable makes sense: Watch out for wolves dressed as sheep, and don't commit serial deception, or people will stop believing you. But what happens when the two stories merge into one? What happens when the serial deception consists of wolves dressing as sheep? What if people begin to suspect not that every boy who cries wolf is lying, but that every sheep is a wolf in sheep's clothing?

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Deception is powerful, and has advantages, many well known. Truth has advantages, too. If stability and decent outcomes are an objective - truth has substantial advantages - and effort is needed to maintain it - and to sort out messes and falsehoods due to either muddle or deceptive intent.

Another moral, in the present circumstances - is that no one can doubt that some sheep may be unavoidably killed by mistake.

jorian319's http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.oaClbDb0e5g.878826@.f28e622/12507 was interesting, too.

jorian319 -10959-60 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.oaClbDb0e5g.878826@.f28e622/12509 read:

"For the war in Iraq to be worthwhile - the Iraqi situation, in Iraqi terms, has to be better than it is. Clearly better.

"For once, Robert, I agree that it is worthwhile belaboring the obvious. For all of us who have endorsed this horrible action, there can be no other vindicatio

rshow55 - 09:00am Jun 8, 2003 EST (# 12397 of 12402)
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.

Jorian319 writes:

"For once, Robert, I agree that it is worthwhile belaboring the obvious. For all of us who have endorsed this horrible action, there can be no other vindication.

jorian319 - 10:38am Apr 2, 2003 EST (# 10960 http://images.radcity.net/5149/359372.mp3

"How much better can it get? How much worse could it be? Listen to that above (Iraqi-born) American.

For the war in Iraq to be worthwhile - the Iraqi situation, in Iraqi terms, has to be better than it is. Clearly better.

"I think we can do that.

- - - -

We better do that. Lying is inherently expensive and dangerous - lying to set up a war that does not make the Iraqi situation better in Iraqi terms is a travesty and a disaster in many, many important ways.

- - - -

Leaders occasionally lie "in good causes" - and perhaps, in my small way I'm "trying to be a leader." -- I've written plenty on this thread that cannot be traced (at least, without the active cooperation of the CIA - and they may have destroyed their records.) But can anyone find anything I've written on this thread, regarding facts, that can be shown to be wrong - where intentional deception can be shown?

I've tried to "tell the truth or nothing" - not saying everything I know, by a long shot - but not lying either.

(5 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense