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.

lchic - 04:55pm Jul 11, 2003 EST (# 12959 of 12965)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

''' The difference between jihad in Islam and extremism is like the earth and the sky '''

Grand Sheikh Mohammed Sayed Tantawi of the Al-Azhar mosque of Cairo - which is seen as the highest authority in Sunni Islam - said groups which carried out suicide bombings were the enemies of Islam.

Speaking at the conference in the Malaysian capital, Kuala Lumpur, Sheikh Tantawi said extremist Islamic groups had appropriated Islam and its notion of jihad, or holy struggle, for their own ends.

He called on Muslim nations to open themselves to dialogue with the West saying Islamic nations should "wholeheartedly open our arms to the people who want peace with us".

"I do not subscribe to the idea of a clash among civilizations. People of different beliefs should co-operate and not get into senseless conflicts and animosity," he added.

Sheikh Tantawi was addressing a gathering of nearly 800 scholars and representatives from various non-governmental organisations.

"Extremism is the enemy of Islam. Whereas, jihad is allowed in Islam to defend one's land, to help the oppressed. The difference between jihad in Islam and extremism is like the earth and the sky," Sheikh Tantawi said.

.... Sheikh Tantawi said Muslim suicide attacks, including those against Israelis, were wrong and could not be justified.

His comments echoed those by Malaysian Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohammed who said, at the opening of the conference on Thursday, that salvation could not be achieved through the killing of innocent people.

Worried that Islam's image is being damaged by terrorists who have hijacked the religion for their own ends, delegates also considered banning books which fuel extremism.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3059365.stm

lchic - 05:03pm Jul 11, 2003 EST (# 12960 of 12965)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

OIL http://www.guardian.co.uk/oil/story/0,11319,996305,00.html

"" ... most of it lies under the sands of the Middle East. Since 1973, when Arab nations imposed an embargo on oil exports to the US, US presidents have been promising to end America's reliance on energy from potentially unfriendly sources.

Mr Bush may succeed where his predecessors failed. The reason is simply this: America is moving swiftly from influencing the affairs of other nations to controlling them.

This shift sees the dovetailing of two strategic imperatives: energy security and terrorism. The hatred and contempt of America is undoubtedly fed by US high-handedness but it can also be funded by oil revenues.

So oil-rich states that have turned a blind eye to militant anti-Americanism will pay a heavy price. Any that seek to use their wealth to buy weapons of mass destruction will also be threatened with American military might. Viewed from such a perspective, it is easy to see why Iran has been targeted by the Bush administration.

Unlike the imperialists of the British empire who sought control of the Middle East's vast oil reserves by owning them, America's approach is more subtle. Getting oil from many different sources - Africa's share of US imports could replace the Middle East's this decade - is not enough of an answer.

It is the price of oil that can bring the American economy to its knees. To see just how destructive oil price shocks can be, it is worth noting that they have cost America $7 trillion dollars (£4.2 trillion) in the past 30 years.

Oil is a fungible commodity, worth nothing until sold. How can America ensure that the price of oil is stable - low enough for its citizens to afford but high enough for producers to recoup investment costs and make tidy profits?

The answer is to tame unruly regions and coax friendly oil-rich nations to pump more oil on to the world markets. Neither is easy especially given that, as populous nations such as China and India grow, the demand for energy will rise, putting upward pressure on the oil price in decades to come. ....

lchic - 04:36am Jul 12, 2003 EST (# 12961 of 12965)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

GT-cia makes admission re uraniumAfrica

Seems those guys in US-UK-AUS all failed their political masters ... it's put truth into opposition sites ours asks:

??? deceit or corruption of the public service ???

lchic - 04:44am Jul 12, 2003 EST (# 12962 of 12965)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

GTcia - My fault bossman

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,996920,00.html

Trading on Fear --- From the start, the invasion of Iraq was seen in the US as a marketing project. Selling 'Brand America' abroad was an abject failure; but at home, it worked. Manufacturers of 4x4s, oil prospectors, the nuclear power industry, politicians keen to roll back civil liberties - all seized the moment to capitalise on the war. PR analysts Sheldon Rampton and John Stauber explain how it worked.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,995669,00.html

US and Europe on brink of trade war --- WTO says Bush's steel tariffs break rules

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,3604,996654,00.html

(3 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense