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 (12792 previous messages)

rshow55 - 01:06pm Jul 1, 2003 EST (# 12793 of 12803)
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.

12540 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.D1nVbHqklos.0@.f28e622/14196

I'm no more a Communist or "left winger" than Eisenhower was. Or than Berle or George Marshall was.

The information and speculation in 4427-8 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.D1nVbHqklos.0@.f28e622/5596 shouldn't be classified. It should be investigated. I should be free to ask for that investigation.

I should be free to ask for some other investigations, too. I believe that it is in the national interest that I get them.

12691 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.D1nVbHqklos.0@.f28e622/14359

Maybe I can respond a bit about "wholistic" aspects of energy production (and global warming control). We ought to solve these problems - and in a real sense, that's possible now .

There are times when I agree - partly - with the Bush administration - and it could be taking very good steps - steps compatible with really optimal solutions - about both energy (which in the end needs to involve a lot of hydrogen) and global warming. Both problems that need simple solutions - solved well and on the proper scale.

The word "proper" is a problem. On the plane back from San Francisco, spent some time reading Letittia Baldridge's Complete Guide to Executive Manners ( Ms. Baldridge was Jackie Kennedy's chief of Staff - and especially chief of protocol). And "propriety" is a problem when the solutions are large scale. "Good manners" and "protocol" and "politics as usual" and "national security concerns" can easily stand like iron bars - stopping change - and substituting "perfumed stagnation" for hope. These good things need not stand in the way of hope - but often do.

Sometimes, the solutions have to be identified and implemented on scales where "proprieties" stand in the way. Eisenhower worried about that.

To deal with awkwardness in a workable way - a sense of propriety is important. Jackie Kennedy and Letitia Baldridge must have known a great deal about JFK's relationship with Mimi Beardsley - dealt with it. I've never asked anyone to do anything that is illicit in the sense that Kennedy's relationshiop with Beardsley was illicit. But I do think it is fair to say that my situation has required "a certain tact."

I am doing just exactly what I promised D.D. Eisenhower and Bill Casey I'd try to do. Sometimes, it seems to me, it may be working in the essential ways they hoped it would.

rshow55 - 01:14pm Jul 1, 2003 EST (# 12794 of 12803)
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.

On tact, and some obligations I have to old investors, to myself, to other people I care about, and to my country:

11884 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.D1nVbHqklos.0@.f28e622/13505

bbbuck's 11883 is interesting, as bbbuck's work often is http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.D1nVbHqklos.0@.f28e622/13943

lchic - 04:01pm Jul 1, 2003 EST (# 12795 of 12803)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

... and i thought of buck as in bronco ...

fredmoore - 07:17pm Jul 1, 2003 EST (# 12796 of 12803)

Bbbuck had to go to the dentist but only had a dollar ....

So the dentist gave him .... buck teeth.

lchic - 09:56pm Jul 1, 2003 EST (# 12797 of 12803)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

rabbits to that

lchic - 11:16pm Jul 1, 2003 EST (# 12798 of 12803)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Links | http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/15562/newsDate/19-Apr-2002/story.htm

    see 2 pulldown menus

More Messages Recent Messages (5 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

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