New York Times on the Web Forums
Science
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.
(5890 previous messages)
rshow55
- 07:50pm Nov 17, 2002 EST (#
5891 of 5896)
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
11/17/02 7:41pm
The question is - Who gave the nation - any
nation - the right to impose its values and believes on
others by force or thread of force? For such, one has to
believe it is above the law or, alternatively, IS the LAW
itself. Both of those propositions are unexceptable in my
view.
In the world as it is - as it has always been, so far as I
know, and as I think it will always be - nations have in
fact been imposing their values and beliefs on others by
force or threat of force.
I think the human condition involves force, and threats of
force, at many levels - and I can't imagine the structure of
life otherwise.
For me, the question is - how do we move - step by step -
from where we actually are - - to a world where power is more
reasonably limited, where people are safer - where human
freedom - never an absolute - is greater - and life is more
beautiful, more often - and less often so ugly.
I've been working - hard - to find ways to cut down the
probability of mass death - and to make the world safer - and
so has lunarchick .
My judgement, now - is that the process of negotiation and
balancing of interest - the insistence on discussion, clear
definition - checking, and standards - is that best path
before us.
And it seems to me that it is time - with the process
having gone as it has gone, for Saddam to disarm now.
If he does - he'd do a great service to the cause of
international law by surviving - and I think he could do so
gracefully, and effectively - if he chose to.
almarst2002
- 08:01pm Nov 17, 2002 EST (#
5892 of 5896)
I personaly don't hold my breath in hope for Saddam's
suvival.
But, in imosing its vill, even benevolent one, on other
nations, is a very dangerous and immoral path in my view.
The really butiful things speak for themselves and do not
need to be forced down the throats. Particularely by
foreigners who always has their well-being first and foremost
in mind. Particularely by those foreigners who happen to live
thousends of miles away and can always retread back to the
safe home leaving the mess behind for the future generations
of the "object of their experiment". Its not very helpfull
today to say sorry for the victims of the bombing in Vietnam
or Korea, but even that was not done.
almarst2002
- 08:08pm Nov 17, 2002 EST (#
5893 of 5896)
"clear definition - checking, and standards"
Standards?
I am all for standards. Even one should recognise that, as
I pointed out many times in a past, in my view, what is
permissible for a small child may be impermissible for a full
grown powerful adult. But just think how far are we from
applying the equal standards for WMD for example.
rshow55
- 08:31pm Nov 17, 2002 EST (#
5894 of 5896)
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
11/17/02 8:01pm . .
"But, in imposing its will . . .on other
nations, is a very dangerous and immoral path in my view."
Always dangerous - and one may say immoral - but
some coercion occurs - whenever law is really necessary
at all. The Iraqi case is fairly easy in some ways. There was
a war. Iraq lost - signed an agreement - and, the argument
goes - didn't live up to it. If it did live up to it - - or if
it is living up to it now -- that can be checked.
almarst2002
11/17/02 8:08pm ... As for standards - they are important
- and they are being renegotated now. And in my view -
starting out from a very bad situation - and still not so far
from it as I'd like -- there's been good effort and good
progress over the last eight weeks. If things could be checked
- and if the convention could be established that
when it matters enough - there are ways to force
checking - - - we could live in a much safer, more stable
world than today.
Though always imperfect.
We could, if some leaders actually wanted - get a good deal
about the past cleaned up, as well. I think a really objective
- multinational - multi-news organization history of
the Cold War - using the web as a tool - would be practical
and very useful now. We've been talking about that, off and
on, since April of 2001 . . . and the time may be getting ripe
where it could be done - if only somebody with real rank would
make a phone call or two.
(2 following messages)
New York Times on the Web Forums
Science
Missile Defense
|