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.

rshow55 - 07:34pm Oct 14, 2002 EST (# 4878 of 4892)
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 had a little problem: rshow55 8/17/02 5:58pm

And though I haven't made promises to the devil himself I did make promises to Bill Casey.

# 330-340 http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7a163/352 are indications of what I think Bill Casey - who managed Ronald Reagan's 1981 campaign - - would have wanted now.

We have some messes. We should fix them

I'm saying so, as a person who is trying to collect a considerable amount of money from the government - for myself, but mainly for my old AEA investors. MD2765 rshow55 6/29/02 7:59am

My efforts to collect that money are matters of fact that can be checked - - from this thread, and from other sources.

My only chance is to be right on the things that actually matter.

It is not in the national interest to make trillion dollar errors.

p.o.d. - 07:36pm Oct 14, 2002 EST (# 4879 of 4892)
Prince of Darkness, Yes it's Me, I'm back

It will all be over pretty soon ..

p.o.d. - 07:47pm Oct 14, 2002 EST (# 4880 of 4892)
Prince of Darkness, Yes it's Me, I'm back

Any idiot mathematician knows zero sum pursuit/evasion stochastics balancing evasive moves against homing accuracy for TBMs outfitted with guidance devices steering reentry patterns for unpredictable trajectories, make narrow band interception impossible. Sick pay-off missile interception if the warhead is <cough> anthrax.

manjumicha - 07:57pm Oct 14, 2002 EST (# 4881 of 4892)

p.o.d. & gisterme

Sorry to pop your bubbles...but last time I checked, Clinton couldn't bomb NKs because they already had ICBMs deliverable to Chicago and the rest....it has been reported that the message was clearly delivered to Bush as well when Kelly went there a week ago....the more reliable (i.e. Non-US) public sources estimate that NK had 20 deliverable ICBMs by 1993 (the first ICBM text that went over Japan was in 1993, 1998 was not the first, notwithstanding the official line). Everything else since then has been public advertisements to US hawks.

What a comical farce to watch the diplomatic line dancing. despite the "big talk", the decision has been made foe Bush Jr.....negotiate with NK but attack everyoen else....btw, Armitage And Powell asked Japanese to negotiate for Bush since Bush can't swallow the admission of NK exception after all that "tough" talk....What a joke...:-)

davemc53 - 07:57pm Oct 14, 2002 EST (# 4882 of 4892)

Any good engineer or scientist can tell you that all equations and/or models are approximations to reality. All equations depend on the context and the level of detail at which one is examining the problem. It seems to me you have spent a great deal of time belaboring the obvious.

gisterme - 08:01pm Oct 14, 2002 EST (# 4883 of 4892)

rshow55 10/14/02 7:34pm

"...And though I haven't made promises to the devil himself I did make promises to Bill Casey. ..."

In case you haven't noticed, Robert, Bill Casey is dead. The devil himself is not. The war in which Mr. Bill Casey was a warrior is over. Nobody that I know of cares much about what Bill Casey promised you...especially since you very conveniently (for you) have presented no documentation, other than what you say, about what was promised. Oh, by the way, you haven't even really said what was promised. However, I admire your courage in admitting that you are trying to collect money from the US government/taxpayers based on your name-dropping and unverifiable claims. Good luck.

(9 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense