New York Times Readers Opinions
The New York Times
Home
Job Market
Real Estate
Automobiles
News
International
National
Politics
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
New York Today
Crossword/Games
Cartoons
Magazine
Week in Review
Multimedia
College
Learning Network
Services
Archive
Classifieds
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 (3884 previous messages)

lchic - 02:36am Aug 22, 2002 EST (# 3885 of 3888)

A vision of dystopia

This is for real, not the sequel to a sci-fi thriller. The World Bank paints a picture of a catastrophic global future if we do not change the way we live

Larry Elliott, economics editor Thursday August 22, 2002 The Guardian

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldsummit2002/story/0,12264,778754,00.html

lchic - 02:40am Aug 22, 2002 EST (# 3886 of 3888)

"" So what is the Bank's blueprint for sustainable development? It says:

· developing countries should act to clean up their governments, promoting participation and democracy, inclusiveness and transparency as they build the institutions needed to manage their resources;

· rich countries need to be less selfish by increasing aid, offering more generous debt relief, opening their markets to developing country exporters and helping transfer technologies needed to prevent diseases, increase energy efficiency and bolster agricultural productivity;

· civil society organisations should be encouraged to serve as a voice for the weak and powerless, and to provide independent verification of public, private and non-governmental performance;

· private firms should be more focused on sustainability in their day to day activities, and have incentives to pursue profit while advancing environmental and social objectives.

kalter.rauch - 04:47am Aug 22, 2002 EST (# 3887 of 3888)
Earth vs <^> <^> <^>

bbbuck 8/22/02 1:13am

Because I like lchic's posts.

Back off, dude......lchic insulted me first! She hates ME the MOST!!!

lchic - 07:38am Aug 22, 2002 EST (# 3888 of 3888)

From GU thread

    "" The White House has been hijacked. We have been terrified into supporting a war-for-profit, because, as Hermann Goering put it, 'they have told us we are being attacked.' Our economy is being bled dry, the constitution has been shredded and the ones profiting are the Bush gang and their wealthy backers.
    The harsh reality is; Mr. Bush and his shadowy bunch , do not respect elections, Congress, the constitution, freedoms, do not respect Democrats or Republicans. In short they operate entirely above and beyond the law.

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

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


Enter your response, then click the POST MY MESSAGE button below.
See the
quick-edit help for more information.






Home | Back to Readers' Opinions Back to Top


Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company | Privacy Policy | Contact Us