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.

lchic - 10:20am Sep 2, 2002 EST (# 4124 of 4133)

The name 'Mandella' became the most recognised in the world ....

What did he do that seemed
'right/correct/good/advanced/approvinglyDifferent' ?

What are others failing to do?

What should they be doing that as yet they aren't doing?

wrcooper - 10:25am Sep 2, 2002 EST (# 4125 of 4133)

Showalter:

The only document you made mention of in your "references" was "The National Missile Defense Readiness Review," a DOD document dated 10 August 2000. You refer to it as the "Coyle Report." That's its hyperlink designation.

I skimmed it carefully. There is no mention in it of the figures you presented. It gives an overall cost estimate of a BMD system at approximately $32 billion, but nothing about the cost of countermeasures.

Once again, I ask you, how did you come up with your numbers? If you're suck a stickler for precision and careful checking, you'll gladly, readily comply with my request for an answer.

lchic - 10:53am Sep 2, 2002 EST (# 4126 of 4133)

BMD - links - see last

The Canadian government must be convinced to say no to the BMD system http://www.acp-cpa.ca/BMDinfosheet.htm

$ http://www.psr.org/bmd.htm

Rogues http://www.wagingpeace.org/articles/01.01/krieger_bmd_AnAlternative%20Approach.html

USA PR july2002 http://usinfo.state.gov/journals/itps/0702/ijpe/martin.htm

$$$$~billion~$$$$

http://www.clw.org/nmd/cochran/blank_check.html

http://www.google.com/search?q=BMD+system+billion&btnG=Google+Search&num=20&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&newwindow=1

BMD system 'ineffective billion'

http://www.google.com/search?num=20&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&newwindow=1&q=BMD+system++ineffective+billion&btnG=Google+Search

wrcooper - 11:03am Sep 2, 2002 EST (# 4127 of 4133)

Ichic:

I am familiar with the arguments against the development of Bush's BMD system, and I too oppose going forward with the system. You needn't do Google searches on keyword "ballistic missile defense," at least for my benefit. I know how to use search engines effectively.

Instead, why don't you encourage Showalter to do what he insists everybody else should do, namely be forthcoming about the sources of his claims, his information, and his methods of analysis, so that they can be checked independently?

Or do you have a double-standard? The rest of the world has to act responsibly, but not Showalter?

rshow55 - 11:24am Sep 2, 2002 EST (# 4128 of 4133)
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.

If Cooper wants to argue "don't have to believe you - I can dismiss you." - - - that works, to a degree. But not always.

Somebody could sue somebody. Some politician or journalist might ask a question that couldn't be avoided. And rules could change.

3640 rshow55 8/11/02 1:54pm ... 3643 rshow55 8/11/02 2:03pm

3664 rshow55 8/12/02 10:45am

"Americans need to be WORTHY of the GOOD THINGS people associate with this flag - - not just wave it. . . http://www.awolbush.com/usaflag1.gif . Our allies, and people all over the world, should be able to expect that. And able to check that. . . . On missile defense issues, and other issues that matter enough.

Sometimes, that means things have to be checked. Even if somebody has to go to some effort - to work through chains of evidence. Trials do that pretty well, fairly often. And this thread works well as pretrial discovery.

(5 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense