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 - 08:11am Apr 13, 2002 EST (# 1330 of 13062)
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.

MD1326 gisterme 4/13/02 3:44am cites my MD1318 rshow55 4/12/02 6:59pm ... which in turn cites MD1314 gisterme 4/12/02 5:15pm where I say gisterme shows a lot of gall, and where I quote some sources that must, according to gisterme , be "naive-" Krugman and Wayne

The White Stuff by PAUL KRUGMAN http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/12/opinion/12KRUG.html

Elder Bush in Big GOP Cast Toiling for Top Equity Firm by LESLIE WAYNE http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/05/politics/05CARL.html

I'd be glad for anyone, whatever their views, to read MD1326 gisterme 4/13/02 3:44am as a response to my MD1318 rshow55 4/12/02 6:59pm . .

but that isn't as important as reading Rich's piece today:

The Bush Doctrine, R.I.P. by FRANK RICH http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/13/opinion/13RICH.html

It takes some kind of perverse genius to simultaneously earn the defiance of the Israelis, the Palestinians and our Arab "allies" alike and turn the United States into an impotent bystander.

Rich ends with this paragraph:

"This is a world with a lot of gray," said Chuck Hagel, the Republican from Nebraska, to The Washington Post late this week. "We can choose either to live in an abstract world or choose to engage in the real world. . . . The reality of that has started to set in with this administration." We must hope that Senator Hagel is right. While it is far too late for an Arafat or a Sharon to change, it is not too late for a young president still in a young administration to get over himself. At this tragic juncture, the world depends on it, because, as his own vice president put it, there isn't anybody else to do the job.

One hopes it isn't too late. But given past actions, and responses such as the ones that so often occur from gisterme honest change and good judgement where a change of view are involved may be too much to expect. Gisterme resembles Condoleeza Rice in an number of ways that can be seen in thread dialog, though she hasn't put a return adress under her posts directing us to Rice, as kandawei directed us to Ann Coulter last year).

The power of the United States, and the credibility of the United States, are being dissipated at a very great rate - by politicians who sometimes resemble criminals, and hucksters, a great deal more than they resemble trustworthy adults -- and who never apologize.

MD943-944 rshow55 3/29/02 5:49pm
MD662 rshow55 3/18/02 9:55am ... MD658 almarst-2001 3/18/02 12:06am

Some significant change is in order -- it it happens, it is very late. Unless it happens, for all the talk of American "Empire" - - - the United States will be margninalized as a proto-Nazi state based on a bought press and a "culture of lying" - - - around Europe, Americans are being asked why they are not ashamed to be Americans. This administration should not be so actively providing reasons for people to ask the question.

I'll be pretty busy with other business today - though I'll try to check this board and participate if I can.

. . .

If the United States were willing to work on the basis of facts , and a sense of proportion that it could explain to itself clearly, and explain to others -- there would be solutions.

rshow55 - 09:42am Apr 13, 2002 EST (# 1331 of 13062)
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.

Some of the basic issues on this thread ought to be easy to resolve, but they aren't -- because even when The New York Times asks for people to look at things -- things that cry out to be looked at, in the national interest -- it can be "water off a duck's back". We have to learn to do better than that. And then do better.

MD543 rshow55 3/14/02 8:18pm ... MD544 rshow55 3/14/02 8:25pm

There are times when the power to persuade must be associated with other kinds of power. I've suggested that if people with power started to ask key questions about facts . . . we might find that some truths that have been "too weak" might be too weak no longer. Because of the forces involved, some leaders of nation states may have to actually ask to get some facts set out, where they can be examined and people can "connect the dots" -- without patterns of diversion that frustrate any and all attempts at getting to facts needed for decent decisions.

It shouldn't be so difficult. But it is, for reasons that are well exemplified by this piece, about the current chairman of the Georgia Republican party:

Bush 2000 Adviser Offered To Use Clout to Help Enron By Joe Stephens Washington Post Staff Writer Sunday, February 17, 2002

" Just before the last presidential election, Bush campaign adviser Ralph Reed offered to help Enron Corp. deregulate the electricity industry by working his "good friends" in Washington and by mobilizing religious leaders and pro-family groups . . . http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A22380-2002Feb16.html

MD158 rshow55 3/3/02 3:54pm

The paterns that Ralph Reed suggests to Enron dominate the Bush administration -- and for short times - if one cares little enough for waste of money, lives, or chances, they "work."

But for long term, workable solutions in a world where many things are fragile, we need right answers -- and the patterns Reed describes and advocates, which dominate this administration, rule right answers out -- and degrade the United States.

(11731 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense