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 - 09:21am Sep 7, 2003 EST (# 13553 of 13557)
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.

12501 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.tcuhb9YgExJ.7732280@.f28e622/14155 June 12, 2003

. I've broken my promises to Eisenhower and others - I promised that I would never, under any circumstances, reveal my relationship with Eisenhower except face to face to a proper authority. The time finally came where it seemed to me that, to keep faith with the things I promised Eisenhower I'd try to do, I had to break that promise.

Here are postings from a Guardian Talk thread from gwbl , that I thought might be of interest.

Not that gbw1 was either Bush, or connected to Bush. But there was an effort to guide the reader's guessing - as the moniker willjusa was also an effort to guide the reader's guessing. It seems to me that a lot in of Gisterme's posts "guide guessing" in analogous ways. http://www.mrshowalter.net/PostsBy_Gisterme.htm

13533 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.tcuhb9YgExJ.7732280@.f28e622/15226 says things I still think right, and ends with this.

There are problems to fix - and a lot of them would be easier to fix if leaders insisted on finding out who gisterme is.

What I think - and what Cooper thinks - wouldn't matter much. We have some agreements - including agreements on matters of consequence - and some basic disagreements about status and propriety. I haven't responded as completely and quickly as I'd like to Cooper - because I've had other things to work on - but stand by this. 13255 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.tcuhb9YgExJ.7732280@.f28e622/14940

This thread includes a large corpus of work from gisterme - and that there is substantial reason to believe that gisterme is closely connected to the Bush administration - and that some gisterme postings may be by GWB himself. Enough is at stake that I believe that, in the interest of the United States - and the interest of decent international relations - the matter ought to be checked - by a staff actually capable of doing the checking - and capable of making the matter public. What I think, and what Cooper things, doesn't matter much. What leaders think would matter.

If there was one chance in 100 that I'm right - this would be worth checking. I don't have to feel sure I'm right to say the checking ought to be done - because the stakes are high.

jorian319 - 09:55am Sep 7, 2003 EST (# 13554 of 13557)

...there is substantial reason to believe that gisterme is closely connected to the Bush administration

I'm sure you have your reasons for repeatedly stating that, Robert. But those "reasons" are hardly substantial. I think the same character flaw that leads you to ingest poison from The Guardian also provides "substance" to your reasons for thinking that gisterme is aggressively lying to you about his position, and about his reasons for posting here.

wrcooper - 10:06am Sep 7, 2003 EST (# 13555 of 13557)

Bob,

What do you see when you look at ink blots?

gisterme 's posts are ink blots.

You discover a reflection of your own fears and hopes and dreams when you read them.

You saw George Johnson in my posts. You see George Bush in gisterme 's.

It's a serious matter to call someone a liar, Bob. You called me a liar, and were proven wrong. You checked, and you were wrong. It's fascinating that you now refuse to apologize for having called me a liar. Why is that, Bob? Now you're calling gisterme a liar. You're accusing him of lying about his identity. That's a serious charge, and you base your accusation on what, exactly?

I asked you to provide several specific quotes from your archive of gisterme 's posts to illustrate what you find particularly supportive of your case that he's Bush or connected to the Bush administration. You haven't done that. Why?

Ink blots, Bob. Tea leaves. Dreams.

(2 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense