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 - 02:50am Oct 3, 2002 EST (# 4726 of 4733)

almarst2002 10/2/02 9:04pm

"...Except a fiew points left in a dark:

1. The same document declares that US will not let any nation become even a regional power.

Since I'm not familiar with that document, Alex, please provide a quote from it that says what you claim. Also, please don't do any "creative editing" on what you post that changes the context of the statements.

"...2. Will those minor players have a fair chance to compete even economicaly while the only superpower holds the keys to major world resources?..."

Of course they will. But what do you mean "holds the keys to the world's resources"? Do you mean wealth? Seems to me that places that have resources would be the ones most interested in peace. That seems to be the way it is already. Consider the oil producing countries of the world. Most wouldn't have any wealth at all if they couldn't sell their oil. If the industrialized world came up with a real alternave energy source those oil producing countries would be bankrupt over night.

"...In short, isn't it in the same line as the US is ready to traide unsubordinated democracy to subordinative dictatorship at any time and place?..."

Nope.

"...Just look at the recent events in Venesuela..."

What events are those? Please fill me in. Does it have anything to do with missile defense?

"...Not to mention the dark days of a Cold War..."

Rules in wartime are different from rules during peacetime.

"...I bet if you had a chance to ask Al Capone, he would prefere the quite Chicago streets as long as he is paid for protection. That's the analogy as I see it. To be the only mafia boss - and no more fighting..."

Some might argue that putting an end to war might be worth it; however, I don't. The US doesn't extort wealth from either friends or enemies. I'd be very surprised to learn of any case where that has been done. Much more often we send our taxpayer's money to those who haven't earned it and probably don't deserve it. That started with the Marshall plan and has continued to this day through various foreign aid programs. I'd venture to say that a look at some records would show that no nation in history has been more generous with it's wealth than the USA. Since handing out money was definately not Al Capone's modus operandi, I'd have to say your analogy is fatally flawed, Alex.

gisterme - 02:59am Oct 3, 2002 EST (# 4727 of 4733)

bbbuck 10/2/02 10:06pm

"...Good points - gisterme. I wish you luck..."

Thanks, Buck.

"...You make no mention of my taunting? (sniff,sniff)..."

Sorry, I didn't read all the posts since I was last up here.

"...Good luck in your effort to get rid of off topic posting..."

Thanks again. Robert will sometimes post on- topic but he has to be forced. He's always insiting on "moral forcing"...I think that's what he must mean. Lchic is another case. :-)

lchic - 04:34am Oct 3, 2002 EST (# 4728 of 4733)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

"...Good points - gisterme. I wish you luck..."

... reads as if Gisterme is packing the kitbag to go to war ... take Johnson - monikers et al, with you ... find him 'things' to do, keep him busy over 'there' ...

lchic - 04:45am Oct 3, 2002 EST (# 4729 of 4733)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Why is 'WAR' the fact and concept still in the vocabulary?

If the leaders of countries were called 'CEO's' and made to be responsible for actions and antics then ....

It might be possible for them to act in ways that they were held 'personally' responsible for ... having personal liability.

Lets take Saddam. Were he to sign a paper that fully declared labs and weapons ... and were this not to be exactly 'true' ... then if leaders had personal responsiblity - he'd be fined for non-declaration (were it so) ... in this way he could be held responsible and 'the people', 'the nationals' spared.

If WAR were obsolete, not an option .... then matters would look to be sorted and cleaned up without violence.

Excellent Communication Channels ... along with personal responsibilty for actions and antics ... wouldn't these lesson war?

Or is war something that folks with two feet in arms sales and Industrial Military production, HAVE TO HAVE ... to keep commissions rolling into their GREED pockets?

One notes the Enron heirachy are being taken to task - greed, theft, hiding truth.

Raises the point - when do people stop - when do they think 'the personal fortune is adequate' .. what do people do with excess dollars - stolen from shareholders ... how do they spend, how do they invest?

Did 'Bill Gates' see something that others fail to see --- the need to invest in human capital?

(4 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense