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.

jorian319 - 10:26pm Oct 21, 2003 EST (# 15377 of 15481)
The earth spin rate is slowing 2 msc/day as evidenced by the additon of a leap second every 500 days - James "I failed math" Nienhuis

I'm looking for a reasonable way that I can leave this thread without having been mangled.

The thread title is Missile Defense, not Dismissal Defense, rs.

I don't think it's reasonable for you to be mangled. Only you know why you say what you say. You can bow out gracefully at your own whim.

lchic - 10:33pm Oct 21, 2003 EST (# 15378 of 15481)
ultimately TRUTH outs : TRUTH has to be morally forcing : build on TRUTH it's a strong foundation

'Spun dry'

'mangled'

cantabb - 10:50pm Oct 21, 2003 EST (# 15379 of 15481)

rshow55 - 05:53pm Oct 21, 2003 EST (# 15367 of 15370)

I meant to say what I said above [rshow55 ‘looking for a reasonable way to leave this thread’] . It is true.

See my comments earlier.

Perhaps this would be a strain on Jorian and Cantabb's imagination - but I think the questions below are worth asking. Suppose Robert Showalter is telling the truth, within the normal limits, about his situation. What would he need to be able to leave this board and function? and a related question: Suppose Robert Showalter is telling the truth, within the normal limits, about his situation. Under what circumstances is he crippled in the ways that matter for function?

Whether you’re “telling the truth,” about your situation, what you’d need “to leave this board and function” or what makes you too “crippled” to ‘function’: ALL deal your personal situation – nothing to do with MD or this board.

What’s this strange link between what you’d ‘need’ to be able to leave this board and your ability to ‘function’ ?

It isn't necessarily true that meeting my needs costs the NYT anything - at least if " the average reader or stockholder of The New York Times" might be looking. Meeting my needs might be something that "the average reader" would be proud to have the NYT do. Not necessarily. But worth considering.

Again, your ‘needs’ are your own personal matters, NOT relevant to this board. Your continued participation on this board can hardly be of any interest (or a worry) to NYT stockholders !

On the other hand, if there is an operational decision to see that I remain crippled in the ways that matter for action - what would "the average reader or stockholder expect me to do? "

Once again, your ability to ‘function’ is in your own hands. The rest seems to have more to do with your paranoia than anything else, even remotely reasonable.

I try to be proud of the decisions I make - and want to make decisions that I could explain, if need be, to everybody I care about. If others try to do the same - a lot could work out well. And should.

You think others don’t make such decisions and explain them to others they care, every day ? How naive !

rshow55 - 06:02pm Oct 21, 2003 EST (# 15368 of 15370)

Here are things I'd like to be able to attempt - with a reasonable chance of a fair hearing. A solar energy project that I think be worth more to the US national security than anything that can possibly happen in Iraq. And some related projects - involving a structure that I know works - worked out at considerable expense to me, the government and investors, that believe could be useful not only for me - but for the nation and the world.

Why do you need “a reasonable chance of a fair hearing” to do things you claim you have the expertise to work on ? You seem to be the ONLY person preventing yourself from working on them !

I've said this before: I would like to be able to set up something very much like AEA again - and do it honestly - and work with Lchic in that format. I'd like to be able to do that with people involved in AEA fully informed, and satisfied to the extent that was reasonably possible. In ways that were reasonably satisfactory to my wife, her husband, the New York Times, other members of families involved, the federal government, and other people more-or-less connected. In ways that most people at the UN, if they happened to notice, might think fair.

ALL matters of your own personal situation and plans. NOTHING to do with this thread or NYT.

What would I need to be able to get a fair hearing for these things? What would cripple me, or anybody else?

Why do you NEED a “fair hearing” to ‘function’ ? If you think what you do on this thread as ‘functioning’/ working, did you have – or needed to have-- a ‘fair hearing’ BEFORE ?

If people are to use thi

(102 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense