New York Times Forums
The New York Times

Home
Job Market
Real Estate
Automobiles
News
International
National
Washington
Business
Technology
Science
Health
Sports
New York Region
Education
Weather
Obituaries
NYT Front Page
Corrections
Opinion
Editorials/Op-Ed
Readers' Opinions


Features
Arts
Books
Movies
Travel
Dining & Wine
Home & Garden
Fashion & Style
Crossword/Games
Cartoons
Magazine
Week in Review
Multimedia
College
Learning Network
Services
Archive
Classifieds
Book a Trip
Personals
Theater Tickets
Premium Products
NYT Store
NYT Mobile
E-Cards & More
About NYTDigital
Jobs at NYTDigital
Online Media Kit
Our Advertisers
Member_Center
Your Profile
E-Mail Preferences
News Tracker
Premium Account
Site Help
Privacy Policy
Newspaper
Home Delivery
Customer Service
Electronic Edition
Media Kit
Community Affairs
Text Version
TipsGo to Advanced Search
Search Options divide
go to Member Center Log Out
  

 [F] 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.


Earliest Messages Previous Messages Recent Messages Outline (14321 previous messages)

rshow55 - 08:22am Oct 5, 2003 EST (# 14322 of 14328)
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 think this thread has been very useful - and on Missile Defense . But another major subject has been journalistic practice. This article raises an interesting question.

Leaks and the Courts: There's Law, but Little Order By ADAM LIPTAK http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/05/weekinreview/05LIPT.html

If they subpoenaed Mr. Novak, for instance, a court would very likely order him to testify.

Which is not to say he would comply. Reporters ordered to reveal their sources almost never do, on the theory that they and their colleagues would have little chance of persuading other sources to trust them if they did. They generally prefer to be held in contempt of court. Reporters have spent time in jail and publishers have paid substantial fines as a consequence.

What if the issue is an unwillingness of reporters to reveal who they are?

13626 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.Ez8CbUQ4LsY.624759@.f28e622/15319 includes this:

12499 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.Ez8CbUQ4LsY.624759@.f28e622/14153

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. Perhaps I simply ran out of strength.

Was that cheating ?

I broke my promise here:

12079 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.Ez8CbUQ4LsY.624759@.f28e622/13710 12080 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.Ez8CbUQ4LsY.624759@.f28e622/13711

A lot of people were outraged by that - but I tried, and others tried, to do it in ways that were unusual, but were not cheating.

13692 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.Ez8CbUQ4LsY.624759@.f28e622/15385 includes this:

Some adjusting seems worth it.

5362 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@192.HKMIaDBNV1h^375722@.f28e622/6722 includes some comments, and a link

4956 gisterme 10/16/02 10:36pm

" I wouldn't bother with this thread if I didn't think the "stakes" (your word) are a joke. Who would? Many lives are at stake here, perhaps including yours and mine. Those are high enough stakes for me.

High enough for me, too.

- - -

Internal consistency and what can be checked are different. I'm not backing down on my story about my relationship with Eisenhower - and don't feel any obligation to do so.

I was selected to work on problems that former President Eisenhower felt, and others felt, were of essential national interest - and difficult.

Muddled as it is - I think this board has made some headway - though it is "just a game."

Nash did a lot of work about games. We need to learn to play some games better - if peace in the world is to be possible.

Some of those "games" involve journalistic practice - in a world where exception handling mechanisms are often necessary.

Suggestion: search "News and the Culture of Lying"

cantabb - 12:46pm Oct 5, 2003 EST (# 14323 of 14328)

lchic - 08:09am Oct 5, 2003 EST (# 14320 of 14322) ~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Primitive cultures and Ancient-Man envisioned gods and spirits within their environs. The horsemen of Mongolia threw god skywards - always watching over as they pillaged on. Many cultures and religions have some concept of 'god' ... and god is always 'on their side'.

Phil Adams/GWB: "There are, of course, his worrying references to God, to the power of prayer, to Evil. Change God to Allah and Bush’s rhetorical style recalls that of bin Laden." ...... Raises the question, regarding the mindful-swirl of god-language, what is 'god' ... a fellow warrior, a leader, a teacher, an example setter, an agent of control, a health and safety officer for the home team, a model to aspire to .... are the images of 'god' by persons of varied belief systems, the one image, or disparate and difinitive, and how do they relate military weapons to 'god' .... has God's-Man the Pope had his last words on Peace and War yet?

What has this got to do with MD or anything remately associated with MD ?

More Messages Recent Messages (5 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

 [F] New York Times on the Web Forums  / Science  / Missile Defense