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 (4308 previous messages)

rshow55 - 10:19am Sep 14, 2002 EST (# 4309 of 4309) Delete Message
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.

I wish people in power would talk to me, and I could have some resources to gather data - in a discussion about end games. Just a dream, I fear. But it seems to me that a lot of lives, many of them American, might be saved, and a lot of agony and terror prevented if that happened.

I've been "going through channels" (my promise to Bill Casey, in the case I've faced, was that I'd "come in through The New York Times " ) - - and working actively at the business, for years now. In many ways - and I don't think they've been accidental ways -- this thread has been a very long debriefing. As events have unfolded, I've debriefed more and more - - always asking, before I went deeper into things I wanted to communicate to the government - - whether there was another way -- whether the disclosure was done on terms that Casey would have approved of. I'm facing some more decisions of that kind now.

In some ways, it seems to me that the administration is trying hard, and doing some things very well. In some other key ways -- I'm concerned -- and not alone. Perhaps this "virtual debriefing" is the best that can be done.

If it is, it says some things about the inflexibilities of AMERICAN arrangements that bear remembering when we ask other nations to make accomodations that look not only reasonable, but simple, to us.

Maybe there are things they aren't doing because they simply can't.

If so, maybe we should look about for other ways of doing the necessary -- ways that can work.

 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