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 (4845 previous messages)

rshow55 - 05:46pm Oct 13, 2002 EST (# 4846 of 4850) 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.

If the same regard for straight dealing were applied to military matters - we'd be safer, and the world would be a more stable, prosperous place. We'd also free up resources that we need - that the world needs - and that we can't afford to waste as we are now doing.

The reasons that accounting and openness matter in corporate life also apply to government action, including our decisions on defense. Tactical surprise is essential. Deception of the larger society is not - especially if we value stability. Patterns of deception involved with defense, in the last decade, dwarf the misrepresentations of the Enron case, and related cases - and have been more expensive, more dangerous, and more corrupting.

Many of the patterns of deception in the two cases also have a certain grim family resemblence.

I filed #340 on Psychwarfare, Casablanca . . . and terror http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7a163/364 last night. It comments on this thread, with many links. I say some things in that posting that involve some personal risks that I've taken - and taken because I thought it was my duty to do so.

President Eisenhower became very concerned about patterns he'd seen, and warned against the military-industrial(political) complex in his FAREWELL ADDRESS of January 17, 1961 http://www.geocities.com/~newgeneration/ikefw.htm

Everything Eisenhower was worried about has happened.

At the same time, there are real risks out there - that have to be dealt with. We now live in a world where there has been so much deception, for so long, that it is hard to get anything at all checked. My experience over the last few years is a pretty stark example of how immune our society has become to checking - even at its highest levels. We have things to clean up.

It will be easier for the United States to deal with its problems if people in other nations - including leaders of other nations - insist on some straight answers. It seems to me that some of that is happening.

When National Security Adviser Rice wrote this, I believe she wrote something profound and hopeful.

" Today, the international community has the best chance since the rise of the nation-state in the seventeenth century to build a world where great powers compete in peace instead of continually prepare for war. . . . . . The United States will build on these common interests to promote global security. " "The National Security Strategy of the United States," http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/20/politics/20STEXT_FULL.html . page 2.

I happen to think those words were sincere, and well intentioned. For those words to be effective - for them to turn out to be true - we need to make decisions based on correct information .

Americans, for all the muddles, often find ways to do that.

lchic - 06:10pm Oct 13, 2002 EST (# 4847 of 4850)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Bali - Quiet Please ...

Sand, sea, moonlight
a little exotica
difference

||||||| B ||||||| A |||||||| N ||||||| G ||||| !!!! ||||||

QANTAS and Airforce together
picked up our children
to bring home the living

Death stalked the homeward flight

One hundred more Aussie corpses
burnt, disfigured, riggamortified
someone's daughter, brother, child
lay awaiting identification

Full Sporting Teams
on end of season R&R
had jersey numbers
Forwards, Backs, Centers

Injured and dead

Backpackers, holidaying families
Shattered and in pieces
Fabrics of Family, rented, torn

The lights, the music, and joy
died along with Bali innocence

Aussie numbers so large, so widespread
A quilted atlas of death, and living hell

Catheral bells rehearse sombre peel

Marching bands lay out a uniform of dignity

Roll calls finalised for publication
list City, town on town

Our ANZACs have 'crossed over'

On our tears they're looking down

Wishing love on their beloveds
and hope
for the world's tomorrow
to put all at their ease
their love a special token
to the gentle Balinese

Sand, sea, moonlight
a little exotica
difference

||||||| B ||||||| A |||||||| N ||||||| G ||||| !!!! ||||||

And some say it is written .....

lchic20002

lchic - 06:32pm Oct 13, 2002 EST (# 4848 of 4850)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Some plan war
others funerals

The days of waiting
inbetween

As the 'dust' of death settles

Are long

lchic2002

More Messages Recent Messages (2 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  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