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 (4805 previous messages)

rshow55 - 11:39am Oct 11, 2002 EST (# 4806 of 4811) 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've been looking back on my relationship with my old master, Bill Casey - - who dominated by brilliance and industry - but had his faults - and lied, when he felt it suited larger purposes, very often. I found this very interesting - though my respect for Casey was very great.

FINAL REPORT OF THE INDEPENDENT COUNSEL FOR IRAN/CONTRA MATTERS Volume I: Investigations and Prosecutions Lawrence E. Walsh Independent Counsel August 4, 1993 http://fas.org/irp/offdocs/walsh/

Chapter 15 William J. Casey http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/walsh/chap_15.htm ends:

"The objectivity, professionalism, and integrity of the Central Intelligence Agency were compromised by Casey's attitude and behavior in connection with the Iran venture. To a large degree, the CIA's top professionals were dragged against their better judgment into supporting a questionable venture conducted by NSC staff who lacked competence and expertise in covert operations. At Casey's insistence, two persons -- Ghorbanifar and Secord -- were placed in key roles, although Agency leaders considered them to be unreliable and unfit for such important and sensitive assignments. As a result, key Agency officials felt obliged to adopt a cynical see-no-evil, hear-no-evil, report-no-evil posture."

mazza9 - 11:42am Oct 11, 2002 EST (# 4807 of 4811)
"Quae cum ita sunt" Caesar's Gallic Commentaries

lchic:

I can appreciate your omnipotence but our system recognizes the fallability of man! Yes you can pronounce from your lofty perch but the fact remains...."Truth, Justice and the American Way" will triumph.

That's why Jorel sent Kalel to Smallville!

More Messages Recent Messages (4 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Cancel Subscriptions  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

 [F] New York Times on the Web Forums  / Science  / Missile Defense





Home | Back to Readers' Opinions Back to Top


Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company | Privacy Policy | Contact Us