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 - 08:08pm Oct 6, 2003 EST (# 14457 of 14512)
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.

White House Official Apologizes for Role in Uranium Claim By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/22/international/worldspecial/22CND-HADLEY.html

I don't see how that could have happened. Rice and Hadley are both too competent to have that happen "by mistake.

We had the President of the United States misinforming the American people to justify a war.

( Which then screwed up . )

The New York Times should want to cover that in every detail - not cover it up.

jorian319 - 08:21pm Oct 6, 2003 EST (# 14458 of 14512)
"Statements on frequently important subjects are interesting." -rshow55

Robert, I think you're mistaking everyone in the world for "someone who gives a damn".

Gisterme committed what is apparently a cardinal sin when he had the temerity to show some sense and informedness - something that many here could exhibit if trolls like you weren't so urgent to declare them agents of Trashcanistan (or someone very close to one).

Where's the EVIDENCE Rshow? If it only exists as something buried between the lines of your endless archives, you're, as they say, S.O.L.

cantabb - 08:26pm Oct 6, 2003 EST (# 14459 of 14512)

lchic - 07:47pm Oct 6, 2003 EST (# 14453 of 14457)

Here comes the co-ordinated "one-two" co-ordinated-dose of more incoherent, 'drivel-ia' !

I read a logic somewhere on the board that went:

Military Complex

Commissions (from) (to) Foundations (to) right wing foundation 'education' (to) rote drivel brain washing (to) career path through academia via right wing 'foundation' funding (to) Power positions in right-wing establishment (to) commission 'thinking' (to) rejection of a wider world viewpoint

SO?

This generalized "dot-connecting" supposed to mean anything relevant to the discussion here ? We read lot more interesting things right here !

Raises the quesiton that if much of the right wing educational way pertains back to Nazzi drivel ....

Doesn't raise the question. Rather, EXPLAINS your blind following of your piper.

Read "1984" or other propaganda techniques used in Europe decades ago. Ad nauseam repeating half-baked, inherently erroneous things doesn't imprive them one bit, even after the nth time.

Would that be a valid reason to check on the history of establishment of some of these foundations (tax-payer paid 'commission') and redirect the financial base into areas of common provision - eg improved Health/Education chances 'poor' families.

You think THAT will explain MD ? Or, anything else ? Unfocused wild-goose chase might net at least some thing.

Re-jig the 'system' for the national 'good' ... sounds logical and would benefit the whole of society.

Nothing to do with MD !

How about helping your leader answer the questions asked.

But remember: "It got understood and exposed."

rshow55 - 08:36pm Oct 6, 2003 EST (# 14460 of 14512)
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.

http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@.f28e622/16168 - - that depends on who cares - and who checks. Things are shifting fairly fast - and it is obvious that some posters recently mobilized care a good deal.

Why?

- - It may be that some journalistic usages will come under scrutiny.

(52 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense