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 - 02:12pm Aug 31, 2002 EST (# 4079 of 4100)
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.

There are so many things on this thread.

Could you find an opinion, about a specific weapons sytem, with whicb you specifically disagree, where you're specifically unclear about my sources?

I generally have tried to give my sources -- often arguments, citations from the web -- and suggestions "here -- look for yourself." People have a chance to look at both the logic, and links I've cited. I haven't done any talking about an "ace in the hole" as far as any technical argument at all goes.

That I can remember - and the way I see it. Maybe you have an example where you disagree - then cite it specifically .

Now, I'm taking my time - but if something specific happens to be bothering you -- why not out with it?

For example, I said that it seemed likely to me that staff support for gisterme's work amounts to of the order of a million dollars by now. Said it as my opinion. That's based on assumptions - but we can discuss the assumptions, and look at reasons for them, right here on this thread.

Want to discuss those reasons?

Meantime, you're not my only concern.

If you're unwilling to call me on the phone - why should I care that much what you think?

wrcooper - 02:24pm Aug 31, 2002 EST (# 4080 of 4100)

mazza9 8/31/02 2:07pm

Lou:

If Saddam becomes a nuclear power we face a 21st Century Hitler with the "big stick". If Al Quida obtains weapons of mass destruction what do you have? A stateless entity with a "big stick".

If Saddam obtained a nuke and we knew of it, then the Israelis would know of it. It would be a race to see who invaded Iraq first in order to destroy it. this is why I have said we need to focus on better intel and interdiction. If a hostile potentate like Saddam got hold of a nuke, we'd need to know about. Then we'd have to go in and take it out.

Building a workable ICBM system is not easy and not easy to hide. Apparently, North Korea's missile would be capable of hitting parts of Alaska and Hawaii. If that country--a rogue state?--ever became a threat, I assume we'd do what was necessary again.

Al Quida is not a nation state it has shown that it is not bound by the norms of international law. Our defense becomes more complicated.

We don't have to worry about ICBMs launched by Al Quaida. That terrorist organization will never have a transcontinental launch capability. However, that might get hold of a nuke small enough to smuggle into this country. But that threat--real enough, I'm afraid--isn't the sort of thing a BMD system would help us against.

We don't need to worry about India or Pakistan, either, as nuclear threats against America.

Plus BMD is scientific research so something like the DCX evolves and maybe there are benefits to obtain!

Sure, but why spend money on a BMD system when we could devote the same money, even much less, to direct research on launch systems, including high-powered lasars for powering lightcraft? It would be stupid and wasteful to develop a weapons system for its spinoffs in the civilian sector.

BMD would be destabilizing visà-vis Russia and China--and perhaps the other major nuclear powers, such as France and England. It would inhibit disarmament. That's the problem.

wrcooper - 02:26pm Aug 31, 2002 EST (# 4081 of 4100)

Just cite your sources, Showalter. You're evading the questions.

Just tell me where you got you figures from. How you verified them.

Stop stalling.

rshow55 - 02:38pm Aug 31, 2002 EST (# 4082 of 4100)
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.

Got anything specific, Cooper? I'm not stalling.

But 10! = 3,628,800 -- too many to count.

Your question, or "demand" - - involves a lot more combinations than that. A lot more.

What sources do you want? Any particular order? For a particular reason?

Narrow down the possibilities for me !

I've asked for specifics. Pick a place where you have a problem, and if I feel like it, when I'm ready, I'll accomodate you.

What sources are you asking for? About what?

I've been specific.

As specific as a person reasonably can -- who has other things to do - - especially to an anonmyous, often evasive and lying character assasin like yourself (at least, in my experience).

Why should I care what you think if you won't call me on the phone?

(18 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense