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.

mazza9 - 05:54pm Aug 12, 2002 EST (#3677 of 3700)
"Quae cum ita sunt" Caesar's Gallic Commentaries

I offered opinions and links to the ABL site. You stated opinions about the mylar balloons. Were you kidding?

I do know the the US has watched Soviet launches and re-entry activities over Kamchatka. The Soviet trawlers off Kawjelin did the same. Decoys were observed in both instances but their efficacy was never proven to my knowledge.

$Trillion dollar mistakes. The B-36 and B-58 never fired a shot in anger, (well actually dropped any ordinance). Was that money wasted? We won the Cold War so maybe that investment paid off. Certainly Viet Nam was a great deal of money wasted and not for lack of weaponry but for a lack of diplomacy? The historians are going to have fun with that one too. Isn't it ironic that McNamara admitted in his book that was published in the 90s that he "knew" that the Viet Nam war was unwinable by 1966-7 but did nothing. I was a 2ndLt and had about as much power as a snail trying to move Mt. Everest. He was the Sec Def and close advisor to LBJ and did NOTHING. The editorial in today's AV&ST is by Sandy Berger. It is a synopsis of his congressional testimony last week. Now he chooses to lecture the Bush Administration and Congress about what the Iraq policy should be. Where was he when the arms inspectors were thrown out of Iraq. What was his advice when it mattered. He like, ex pres Clinton should be quiet and go about their own business. They had their chance and failed! Part of the problem today is a bunch of rookies think that "bein' smart" is all it takes.

Which brings us back to the point of should we discuss equipment or policy on this forum. Answer: Both.

LouMazza

rshow55 - 06:10pm Aug 12, 2002 EST (#3678 of 3700)

Wasn't kidding about the mylar balloons. What's your objection to them?

"Your knowledge."

What knowledge?

What about your hundreds of statements about hardware?

Do you have any technical or human integrity at all?

mazza9 - 06:25pm Aug 12, 2002 EST (#3679 of 3700)
"Quae cum ita sunt" Caesar's Gallic Commentaries

Robert:

I've read Aviation Week and Scientific American for over 40 years! I'm not an engineer. I'm not a mathematician. I am a historian. I have my opinions and was educated by teachers who insisted that you can be informed and contribute to society even though you are not the universal man that Jefferson, Goethe, and Asimov were.

Technical integrity? What does that mean? Must I have a degree in medicine to offer opinions about Medicare. The Junior Senator of New York had no educational basis for her attempt to restructure the entire US medical industry.

Human integrity. What are you saying? Do you suggest that my position is dishonest? What is your basis for that conclusion? You've invested a great deal here. Is this an ego trip for you? Are you being honest with the rest of the forum and the NYTimes who sponsors this venue? I certainly haven't used this forum for personal advancement. Is it honest for you to subject us to this angst about Casey, the CIA and your perceived wrongs at the hands of Ann Coulter, Condi Rice, George Johnson, et al?

LouMazza

rshow55 - 07:49pm Aug 12, 2002 EST (#3680 of 3700)

What about your hundreds of statements about hardware?

rshow55 8/12/02 4:33pm

mazza9 - 08:18pm Aug 12, 2002 EST (#3681 of 3700)
"Quae cum ita sunt" Caesar's Gallic Commentaries

Informed opinion. I don't believe that you ever cited a particular fact regarding decoys. But you did say that missile defense would not work. That is an informed opinion but not fact either.

What about you incessant references to your problem and relationship with Mr. Casey. The old, "well if I tell you I'll have to kill you" security mismash. Why mention it at all if there can be no verification of your statements.

I was a crypto security officer and had access to Top Secret SIOP ESI material. Although most of that information is 30 years old, it's not the thing that will be declassified any time soon. So I don't talk about it. Oh it might be Confidential by now but still not for publication. I remember conducting security training where I admonished new crewmen that they might see classified material in the newpaper since newsmen can discern a great deal. However, you NEVER tell the media that there speculations are indeed facts. That action is, in fact RELEASING CLASSIFIED INFORMATION. I have used the Internet to search and read about missile defense and have provided links as well as statements. So have you, I suppose. I don't question your veracity and get all huffy. Why do you?

LouMazza

almarst2002 - 09:04pm Aug 12, 2002 EST (#3682 of 3700)

mazza9 8/12/02 5:54pm - "when the arms inspectors were thrown out of Iraq."

USA Today Repeats Myths on Iraq Inspectors - http://www.fair.org/activism/usat-iraq.html

"But Iraq did not "expel" the UNSCOM weapons inspectors; in fact, they were withdrawn by Richard Butler, the head of the inspections team. The Washington Post, like numerous other media outlets, reported it accurately at the time (12/17/98): "Butler ordered his inspectors to evacuate Baghdad, in anticipation of a military attack, on Tuesday night."

almarst2002 - 09:13pm Aug 12, 2002 EST (#3683 of 3700)

Fending Off the Threat of Peace - http://www.fair.org/media-beat/020809.html

lchic - 02:40am Aug 13, 2002 EST (#3684 of 3700)

The Poster is an historian.

The Poster is unemployed.

When did history STOP!?

(16 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense