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 - 09:23pm Nov 11, 2002 EST (# 5636 of 5651)
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.

almarst2002 11/11/02 9:15pm - - - I think that the odds of impartiality are quite good - and if Russia, at its own expense, wanted "kibbitzers" close at hand - to help assure impartiality - they'd probably be welcomed - - and it would cost little.

Much of the Bush administration does want regime change -- but they negotiated that away at the UN and the Americans and Brits will live up to their end of that bargain if the rest of the bargain is kept.

If you ask "what is the point of this game" - - - one point - I believe, like you - is a military-industrial complex grown too large - out of balance --- out of good control.

You should work to obsolete them -- not reinforce them.

The weapons inspections should go on, Iraq, and other nations should do their best to facilitate the process - and we'll be in a much better situation to reduce excessive US military force and influence.

War might be avoided - probably would be avoided. If the US went to war in a morally indefensible way, even so - the better the effort to support the inspection - the weaker the overall US position in that event would be.

Screw up - and set up a war - shun the inspections - and that is just what Saddam looks like he's stupidly doing - - and exactly the opposite happens. It is a guaranteed disaster for both the Iraqi leadership and people - and reinforces every fear and concern you have, almarst.

almarst2002 - 09:25pm Nov 11, 2002 EST (# 5637 of 5651)

lunarchick 11/11/02 9:19pm

Exactly. In the West, the scorpion would wait to cross the river first.

rshow55 - 09:27pm Nov 11, 2002 EST (# 5638 of 5651)
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.

almarst2002 11/11/02 9:17pm . . die honorably resisting arms inspections under these circumstances?

I think you're being so emotional that you've lost your perspective - and are taking a crazy position.

All such "honor" will produce is a lot of rotting corpses.

The Iraqis should choose life.

If the weapons inspections can't avoid war - then there will be time to fight honorably.

Now, fighting instead of facing inspections is moral cowardice and crazy.

yplei - 09:30pm Nov 11, 2002 EST (# 5639 of 5651)

only test

almarst2002 - 09:32pm Nov 11, 2002 EST (# 5640 of 5651)

rshow55 11/11/02 9:23pm

"The weapons inspections should go on, Iraq, and other nations should do their best to facilitate the process - and we'll be in a much better situation to reduce excessive US military force and influence."

Only if you believe the disarmament is a goal. But what if disarmament is designed to make an agression less costly? Remember, the US insists it will not be tied by the UN. And any country can claim the Iraq still posesses WMD after any kind of inspections. Nothing could be arranged easier.

So, why to help the scorpion accross the river after one recognised its a Western Scorpion and not a butterfly it pretended to be some 20 years ago?

(11 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense