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 - 07:30pm Nov 4, 2002 EST (# 5461 of 5470)
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.

Never said that the N. Koreans were nice guys.

It is stupid not to talk to them.

I did not say that they should be trusted.

Should G.W.Bush be trusted? Why? http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7b085/313

To sort out problems, including problems of peace (and the smaller related muddles of the missile defense boongoggle) people have to face the truth, tell the truth, and avoid misinformation. When right answers really count, they have to "connect the dots" ( MD1055 rshow55 4/4/02 6:54am) so that patterns emerge -- and to check those patterns.

Here are some OpEd pieces by Paul Krugman quoted on the NYT Missile Defense thread:

The Big Lie http://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/27/opinion/27KRUG.html

Bad Heir Day http://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/30/opinion/30KRUG.html

The Great Divide http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/29/opinion/29KRUG.html

The Smoke Machine http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/29/opinion/29KRUG.html

Connect the Dots http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/02/opinion/02KRUG.html

At Long Last? http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/05/opinion/05KRUG.html

The White Stuff http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/12/opinion/12KRUG.html

Losing Latin America http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/16/opinion/16KRUG.html

The Angry People http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/23/opinion/23KRUG.html

A number of links discussing Krugman's pieces are set out in MD1741 rshow55 4/24/02 9:37am

The question of a "vast right-wing conspiracy" is raised, and given focus, in .

The Smoke Machine http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/29/opinion/29KRUG.html and Connect the Dots by PAUL KRUGMAN http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/02/opinion/02KRUG.html

and most recently and explicitly in

The Pitt Principle by Paul Krugman http://www.nytimes.com/2002/11/01/opinion/01KRUG.html

William Webster was chosen to head a crucial new accounting oversight board precisely because industry lobbyists believed he would be ineffectual.

I believe that the "American Empire" is as large as it is, and has some of the characteristics that it does, because the interest of the United States, as a nation, has diverged from the interests of a "military-industrial-political complex" constructed to fight the Cold War, that has taken a dangerous degree of control over US government affairs since that time. The American "missile defense" program is interesting for some of the same reasons that the Enron affair b http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/1/Transcripts/721/4/business/_ENRON-PRIMER.html . . . is interesting.

The "missile defense" programs are nonsensical and corrupt, in the senses that ought to matter either technically or militarily, and illustrates broader corruptions that concern the whole world, because American power is as great as it now is, and is used as it now is.

Checking on these issues is important - but for it to happen, some leaders of nation states are going to have to be interested - as I believe they should be, because it is risky to be led, and to defer, to an administration that is taking positions that go wrong, and produce unnecessary risks, costs, and fighting, again and again.

MD1076 rshow55 4/4/02 12:20pm

MD1077 rshow55 4/4/02 12:21pm ends with this:

"I believe that I'm doing, as nearly as it possibly can be done, exactly what Bill Casey would want me to do now, for the good of the United States of America and the decency of the world.

mazza9 - 08:06pm Nov 4, 2002 EST (# 5462 of 5470)
"Quae cum ita sunt" Caesar's Gallic Commentaries

Robert:

You continue to invoke the name Bill Casey. How do you expect anyone to verify/connect the dots concerning you pronouncements?

You're as aimless as the situation that you avow. Confusion is the hallmark of your posts. Is that the means and methods of discerning the truth?

(8 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense