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 - 06:49pm Sep 13, 2003 EST (# 13643 of 13649)
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.

Gisterme , I owe you a limited apology.

The specific statement

"...Gisterme feels very strongly that it is cheating to work to solve these problems in any way that can be economical and effective..."

was indeed disproportionate, unfair, and false as stated. Though I notice you are focused, and don't contest some other things. This seems true to me:

"...Gisterme feels very strongly that it is cheating to work to solve these problems in very many of the ways that I believe would be most economical and effective..."

That's a significant difference - and I owe gisterme a limited apology - on that point - but not on some others.

Gisterme , I have to admit that you try hard - and so does GWB .

I want to think of the appropriate apology - that does acknowledge an overstatement (and perhaps an unfair overstatement) on my part - without apologizing for some things that, it seems to me - you deserve to hear.

While I'm thinking about an apology in more detail - I'd like to post this.

On Feb 28th, 2001 , just before this thread was restarted, manjumicha2001 asked me to summarize everything I could in two sentences. http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md11000s/md11920.htm

Here they are:

" If the United States could, and would, explain its national interest -- distinct from the interests of its military-industrial complex, and explain how its interests fit in the interconnected world we live in -- and do it honestly, and in ways that other nations could check, it could satisfy every reasonable security need it has, without unreasonable or unacceptably unpopular uses of force.

" The rest of the world, collectively, and in detail, would try hard to accomodate US needs, if it understood them, and could reasonably believe and respect them.

That was written after September 11, 2000 http://www.mrshowalter.net/NYTWebFrontPage_9_11_02.htm

I was terribly concerned before 9/11 - and on September 10th posted this on the Guardian http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md01000s/DetailNGR.htm

Those indented sentences were written after some discussions with Gisterme of September 13, 2000 http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md8000s/md8969.htm - where I summarized, nearly verbatim, lessons a very senior soldier had taught me.

I think those two sentences from http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md11000s/md11920.htm are still true.

International law is being renegotiated - and when agreements are in the process of being renegotiated - they are also in temporary or partial abeyance 9522 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.9UGZbqj5Fb1.9054874@.f28e622/11062

The Bush administration, intentionally or not - may be getting the world much better organized than it has been.

8830 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.9UGZbqj5Fb1.9054874@.f28e622/10356

8832 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.9UGZbqj5Fb1.9054874@.f28e622/10358

8833 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.9UGZbqj5Fb1.9054874@.f28e622/10359

We need answers that fit the real needs and circumstances we're in.

- - - -

I'm sorry I overstated something important. My motivations weren't completely pure when I did it. But I was trying to elicit a response.

I think Gisterme tries very hard.

God help me, I try, too.

I'll be working on an

rshow55 - 06:53pm Sep 13, 2003 EST (# 13644 of 13649)
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.

I'll be working on an appropriate apology. There is a comment about apologies in http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md11000s/md11920.htm .

So far, I see no reason to apologize about this:

Now, in my opinion - Gisterme was cheating when he posted 13544 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.9UGZbqj5Fb1.9054874@.f28e622/15236 - - because I think he was lying.

. Gisterme: "I will certainly not impersonate the President or any other government official."

I've posted strong suggestions that gisterme was connected to the Bush administration - and was actively misrepresenting that. http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.eea14e1/10363

Could I be wrong? Sure. The fact that anybody can be wrong is a major point I'm trying to get across so people actually understand it on this thread.

But so far - I still think you are lying on the point just above, Gisterme.

Or that that's the way to bet.

(5 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense