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 - 01:34pm Sep 18, 2002 EST (# 4371 of 4383)

Interesting posts on Pinker( http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/17/science/social/17PINK.html?pagewanted=1 above), he's taken on the work of Harris

http://abcnews.go.com/onair/DailyNews/jrharris080999_chat.html

DOCUMENTARY - DO PARENTS MATTER? How much blame do parents deserve when their children turn out badly? And how much credit when they turn out well? None according to Judith Rich Harris, author of the controversial book – The Nurture Assumption. This program tells the remarkable story of Harrris, a 62 year old American suburban grandmother who has lobbed a hand grenade into academic establishment and parenting circles with her radical new theory – children’s personalities don’t come from their parents, but from their peers. (From the UK, in English). PG (Rpt)

http://home.att.net/~xchar/tna/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Question - which part of the brain deals with Nuclear Missiles?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/hottopics/intelligence/index.shtml#anim
http://home8.swipnet.se/~w-80790/index.htm
http://faculty.washington.edu/wcalvin/bk8/index.htm
.... still trying to figure this out ..... ?

lchic - 01:43pm Sep 18, 2002 EST (# 4372 of 4383)

Demo Slides - Brain 'thinking' http://faculty.washington.edu/wcalvin/Demo1.htm

lchic - 01:51pm Sep 18, 2002 EST (# 4373 of 4383)

Rome, AD ... Rome, DC?

They came, they saw, they conquered, and now the Americans dominate the world like no nation before. But is the US really the Roman empire of the 21st century? And if so, is it on the rise - or heading for a fall? Jonathan Freedland sifts the evidence

Wednesday September 18, 2002 The Guardian

The word of the hour is empire. As the United States marches to war, no other label quite seems to capture the scope of American power or the scale of its ambition. "Sole superpower" is accurate enough, but seems oddly modest. "Hyperpower" may appeal to the French; "hegemon" is favoured by academics. But empire is the big one, the gorilla of geopolitical designations - and suddenly America is bearing its name.

Of course, enemies of the US have shaken their fist at its "imperialism" for decades: they are doing it again now, as Washington wages a global "war against terror" and braces itself for a campaign aimed at "regime change" in a foreign, sovereign state. What is more surprising, and much newer, is that the notion of an American empire has suddenly become a live debate inside the US. And not just among Europhile liberals either, but across the range - from left to right.

Today a liberal dissenter such as Gore Vidal, who called his most recent collection of essays on the US The Last Empire, finds an ally in the likes of conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer. Earlier this year Krauthammer told the New York Times, "People are coming out of the closet on the word 'empire'." He argued that Americans should admit the truth and face up to their responsibilities as the undisputed masters of the world. And it wasn't any old empire he had in mind. "The fact is, no country has been as dominant culturally, economically, technologically and militarily in the history of the world since the Roman empire."

Accelerated by the post-9/11 debate on America's role in the world, the idea of the United States as a 21st-century Rome is gaining a foothold in the country's consciousness. The New York Review of Books illustrated a recent piece on US might with a drawing of George Bush togged up as a Roman centurion, complete with shield and spears. Earlier this month Boston's WBUR radio station titled a special on US imperial power with the Latin tag Pax Americana. Tom Wolfe has written that the America of today is "now the mightiest power on earth, as omnipotent as... Rome under Julius Caesar".

But is the comparison apt? Are the Americans the new Romans? In making a documentary film on the subject over the past few months, I put that question to a group of people uniquely qualified to know. Not experts on US defence strategy or American foreign policy, but Britain's leading historians of the ancient world. They know Rome intimately - and, without exception, they are struck by the similarities between the empire of now and the imperium of then.

The most obvious is overwhelming military strength. Rome was the superpower of its day, boasting an army with the best training, biggest budgets and finest equipment the world had ever seen. No one else came close. The United States is just as dominant - its defence budget will soon be bigger than the military spending of the next nine countries put together, allowing the US to deploy its forces almost anywhere on the planet at lightning speed. Throw in the country's global technological lead, and the US emerges as a power without rival.

There is a big difference, of course. Apart from the odd Puerto Rico or Guam, the US does not have formal colonies, the way the Romans (or British, for that matter) always did. There are no American consuls or viceroys directly ruling faraway lands.

But that difference between ancient Rome and modern Washington may be less significant than it looks. After all, America has done plenty of conquering and colonising: it's just that we don't see it that way. For some historians, the founding of America a

(10 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense