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.

gisterme - 02:32am Sep 3, 2003 EST (# 13478 of 13481)

"...How were things at the ranch?"

Gawd, Will. Just go ahead and throw some gas on the fire, would you? :-)

Actually I went to Spokane, WA (have some rental property there) then spent some time camping on the Oregon coast. It was deeelightful.

wrcooper - 08:40am Sep 3, 2003 EST (# 13479 of 13481)

Gisterme,

That sounds like a great trip! I'll be leaving in about a week and a half for some hiking in the White Mountains. Can't wait!

mazza9 - 10:15am Sep 3, 2003 EST (# 13480 of 13481)
"Quae cum ita sunt" Caesar's Gallic Commentaries

White Mountains???? What would Jesse Say? Certainly sounds like a lack of Alpine Affirmative Action.

What you Say? A diversity dig? Only to confuse Robert with this code talk.

As Elmer would say, "Dots all Folks!"

rshow55 - 10:44am Sep 3, 2003 EST (# 13481 of 13481)
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.

Bush Looks to U.N. to Share Burden on Troops in Iraq By DAVID E. SANGER http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/03/international/middleeast/03PREX.html

WASHINGTON, Sept. 2 — President Bush agreed today to begin negotiations in the United Nations Security Council to authorize a multinational force for Iraq but insisted that the troops be placed under American command, according to senior administration officials.

Mr. Bush's decision came in a meeting this afternoon with Secretary of State Colin L. Powell. While not unexpected, it was a tacit admission that the current American-dominated force is stretched too thin. It also amounts to one of the most significant changes in strategy since the end of major combat in Iraq.

http://www.mrshowalter.net/Sequential.htm

Negotiations have to proceed on the basis of what happened in the past. And the word of the present administration has to be interpreted on the basis of the way that it has behaved, domestically and internationally.

What is said and what is done both count.

This thread has been going on a long time. Here are interesting comments by gisterme and almarst in May and June 2001

http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md4000s/md4265.htm

http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md4000s/md4282.htm

http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md6000s/md6335.htm

A lot of interesting things have happened since November of last year http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.saJqbYtPDhT.6938673@.f28e622/7194

I got so "confused" by the postings after Almarst's 13472 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.saJqbYtPDhT.6938673@.f28e622/15163 that, though I've done a lot of searching, I haven't responded.

I do hope people look at The growth of Human Powers Over the Past 100,000 Years http://www.mrshowalter.net/Kline_ExtFactors.htm and ask some simple questions.

What do Berle's Laws of Power have to mean, to apply sensibly to sociotechnical animals?

How can sociotechnical animals satisfy Maslow's needs?

What can the symettry condition called the golden rule reasonably mean to sociotechnical animals?

We could be clearer than we are about when and how exclusion and inclusion are necessary or justified - and clearer than we are about when lies and deceptions are justified.

Gisterme , Will - sometimes "be back to you" is a good answer.

http://www.mrshowalter.net/Sequential.htm http://www.mrshowalter.net/Sequential.htm http://www.mrshowalter.net/Sequential.htm http://www.mrshowalter.net/Sequential.htm . . . shows some objective things - that are consistent with many, many, many stories and interpretations - but that rule a lot out.

What works "every which way?"

(More formally and applying a tougher test "what's canonical?" )

Some useful things do.

Discussions of "who the bad guy is" are interesting - and the way those discussions go can be interesting. But "who is the bad guy" isn't the only important question - when reasonable arrangements have to be made.

I'm having fun, and sometimes laughing, at the writings of Douglas MacArthur - who I think would have been amazed at (and ashamed of) George Bush - and gisterme , too - if he noticed gisterme.

I don't think I'm moving too slowly.

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense