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.

cantabb - 04:44pm Sep 18, 2003 EST (# 13742 of 13824)

gisterme - 04:07pm Sep 18, 2003 EST (# 13740 of 13740)

That was a rhetorical question, cantabb. Didn't you read the rest of the post? ;-]

I did know that. I just wanted to add on to it.

So it seems that the topic is multi-dimensional.

Most topics in popular science are multi-dimensional. So is MD : Don't we have other MD issues besides the science of it ? [rhetorical]

For instance, on 'Science in the News' forum or, as bbuck raised, GM food, you see not only the 'science' of it, but also a huge variety of other issues, from political to environmental to public interest.

But that does NOT mean personal tales, poster identity speculations, conspiracy theories and discussion on other matters totally UNrelated. Not to mention, the self-referential rehash. Occasional digression is sometimes understandable.

Not including MD under "science" because it's classified as having a political dimension or not including it under "politics" because it's classified as having a technical dimension might just be an example of how something could be "classified out of existance" to use rshow's term. Although that's certainly not what he meant, I have to admit that it's the first real example of the idea I've found that makes any sense. :-)

That's NOT how it works, am afraid. Check other science forums.

IF this forum is "classified out of existance" [if ever NYT gets around to it] it would most probably because it has out-lived its own usefulness and purpose. To have (or allow) personal problems constantly imposed on a public forum (no matter how legitimate) is, in my opinion, NOT the purpose of any public forum.

cantabb - 04:49pm Sep 18, 2003 EST (# 13743 of 13824)

jorian319 - 04:27pm Sep 18, 2003 EST (# 13741 of 13742)

gisterme: ...the bottom line for me is not whether it's possible or not (I'm sure it is) but whether it's needed or not.

Jorian: Agreed. A smuggled or domestically assembled device would seem a much greater threat than one delivered (suicidally, by the country of origin) by missile.

It may be possible, but we don't really have it, do we ? Do we need it? Do we need to spend more money on it, in view of other budgetary demands ? And related Q's, quite appropriate.

WHY NOT focus on it, then ? Instead of ......

jorian319 - 04:58pm Sep 18, 2003 EST (# 13744 of 13824)

It may be possible, but we don't really have it, do we ? Do we need it? Do we need to spend more money on it, in view of other budgetary demands ? And related Q's, quite appropriate. WHY NOT focus on it, then ? Instead of...

Well, cantabb, one of the reasons this forum lacks focus IMO, is that the issue is simply NOT as pressing as dealing with other, more imminent threats. Do we need (to spend more money on) it? I think there is a gestalt in this country that would render an answer of "no" to that question. OTOH, there is a reason that such decisions are not made at the public level.

cantabb - 05:45pm Sep 18, 2003 EST (# 13745 of 13824)

jorian319 - 04:58pm Sep 18, 2003 EST (# 13744 of 13744)

...OTOH, there is a reason that such decisions are not made at the public level.

The lack of pressing need NOW may be one reason for lack of interest. BUT that doesn't mean one can turn the forum into a kitchen sink. Why lack of focus ? Why interminably repetitious cycle of self reference to nebulous matters ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the Forum ?

I see that you and other 'regulars' are pretty turned off. BUT I also see some posters not only like the slop, but ADMIRE it reverentially, and ask for more.

I might start watching this Forum

cantabb - 06:14pm Sep 18, 2003 EST (# 13746 of 13824)

jorian319 - 04:58pm Sep 18, 2003 EST (# 13744 of 13744)

On public discussion and public decisions on defense matters: We don't do it openly NOW, and, I don't expect they will do it on MD. Lot of times we don't really know what we do already have. ALL for obvious security reasons !

(78 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense