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.

gisterme - 09:08pm Oct 2, 2002 EST (# 4719 of 4733)

rshow55 10/2/02 8:28pm

"...Perhaps my duty now is to see that the swords in question become obsolete ?..."

Why should I or anybody else object to that, Robert? My own opinion is that nuclear bombs became obsolete after the first one was dropped.

So go ahead. Make all weapons obsolete. Start with box cutters. That might be a good first step.

"...For a long time, gisterme and I discussed the issues and procedures set out in 1075-6 rshow55 4/4/02 1:20pm..."

For a long time, Robert? I don't think so. That was only a couple of posts. You may have been talking about it for a long time since but we weren't discussing. Don't be so dishonest.

"...With just a little facilitation - some key issues could become clear . - - - mainly this one - that the "missile defense" program is a technical fraud - or, speaking more kindly - pork, impure and simple - and misleadingly portrayed..."

What sort of facilitation would that be, Robert? You've been talking about the boondoggle theory for a couple of years now; why is "a little facilitiation" so hard to come by if MD is all a fraud?

Let's see...what's the score in these early stages of the MD test program? Four successes out of six attempts if I recall correctly? Doesn't sound like fraud to me. You'll have to come up with some pretty serious "facilitation" to undo that record.

Even though you used more than one sentence, you've still made your "boondoggle" claim without any substantiation.

You should re-read Lou's "If only" post above. Where he suggests putting in your own adjective just put in "facilitation" instead. I know it's not an adjective but you're saying that "facilitation" is what you need to make your world right...

So, Robert, what exactly do you mean by facilitation????

almarst2002 - 09:28pm Oct 2, 2002 EST (# 4720 of 4733)

gisterme 10/2/02 7:35pm

" that was stupidly believed by the CDC"

I don't think so. Remember, it happend AFTER Iraq used chemical warfare against Iran. In my hamble view, those germs where intended to be used against Iran as well. On the other hand, if you trully believe the US Government is so foolish, why don't you question their statements and assumptions today? after all, the Bush I was hardly less experienced then Bush the II.

" there are plenty of other places that better watch out."

Indeed there are. And they know it. If as a realists claim, the Al Capone's world id the only real-politics possible, better watch out even your sweared "friends".

"Iraq has covertly funded and otherwise aided and abetted the worldwide terrorist movement to the extent that it has become a threat to the domestic tranquility of the US and the rest of the world"

Bush nor Blair was able to provide any credible evidence of that. And, if you would be interested in a matter, you could learn that Saddam - a secular dictator, was a great enemy of islamists or any other religious power. Additionally, he never trusted the men not under his full control. Not to mention delivering the most deadly wearpons to their hands.

"Iraq has refused to abide by the UN resolutions it agreed to at the end of the Gulf War concerning development of WMD."

That was never proved more then a speculation, however reasonable it may be.

"Iraq has refused to abide by the UN resolutions it agreed to at the end of the Gulf War concerning development of WMD."

May be he knows how many people are seriously interested in what lies deep in Iraqi's oil? Including our great friend - Turkey. No to mention the Big Boss.

"We need a ballistic missile defense exactly because Iraq has been working hard to acquire/develop long range ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear warheads."

Can you count just how many countries already have such missiles and nuclear bombs? If you believe in suicidal nations, then the only way for US to feel safe is to eliminate the rest of the World once and for all. And, on the same line, how dear you get out on the street with no assurance some suicidal maniac attacks and kills you even before the eyes of a policemen?

Connect the dots if you can. But it does not seems so simple to me.

bbbuck - 10:06pm Oct 2, 2002 EST (# 4721 of 4733)
'How much do you make?'...'Well I'd have to look at the books, but I think around $100 week'....wife-'You don't make $100 a week'...husband-'They can't prove that, we don't keep books'..

Good points - gisterme. I wish you luck.
You make no mention of my taunting? (sniff,sniff)
They do (looneychic, rshowalter) the same thing on the guardian.
Ofcourse at the guardian, you start your own thread, there are 1000's of them, so another thread is no big deal.
looneychic linked to one, and their were posters remarking 'have you read that thread where one guy, rshowalter, is the only one posting.
I myself have wondered what the deal is. But have not cared enough to pursue it.
Good luck in your effort to get rid of off topic posting.

buck johnson.

gisterme - 12:39am Oct 3, 2002 EST (# 4722 of 4733)

lchic 10/2/02 8:30pm

"...I recall the time when neither of us posted on the board for a while - that was when the NYT banned international discussion here re ME - as anthrax - that was USA Govt Anthrax ...etc..."

Doesn't surprise me that you got banned during an anthrax quarantine, lchic. :-) What's your idol's excuse?

(11 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense