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 - 07:56am Nov 18, 2002 EST (# 5910 of 5919)
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.

U.S. Taking Steps to Lay Foundation for Action in Iraq By JAMES DAO and ERIC SCHMITT http://www.nytimes.com/2002/11/18/international/18MILI.html

Careful work.

Standards are being renegotiated in the working out of practical circumstances - now. rshow55 11/17/02 8:31pm . Things are rough - and surely very imperfect from many points of view. But it is just possible that things that have gone well will continue to.

If that happened, the bad things about the past that Almarst has pointed out still couldn't be undone - but they might be much better explained and more widely understood.

And things might get better.

lunarchick - 10:49am Nov 18, 2002 EST (# 5911 of 5919)

Suddam Hussien Iraq-BBC

rshow55 - 11:49am Nov 18, 2002 EST (# 5912 of 5919)
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.

Everybody involved in action and judgement faces some logical and moral problems in the Iraqi situation - and a lot of other situations. I may be muddled about some of my own opinions in the area - but I'm sure that I'm not alone in that.

Is it unacceptable, is it contradictory, is it illogical, is it ugly, for Saddam Hussien to continue as the leader in Iraq?

I think the answer to each of these questions might be "yes" . . . but all the same - I think we'd all be safer if we were clearer in the real, complicated context that actually exists about exactly why, in clear and explainable detail.

People would not agree about the answers in every case. But we'd all be safer if we could be clearer about what answers could make sense to what people.

For certain very important problems of complex cooperation and peacemaking - the logic of this situation needs to be clarified soon.

A workable international law will depend on many things. This is one of them.

Saddam is one clarifying example - Bill Casey would be another. Kissenger would be another. I might be considered as an example, as well.

I'm not advocating mercy, or any rejection of justice. But these problems are real - and without getting clearer about them than we are - we're stumped - and stumped seriously enough that things will be uglier than they'd have to be otherwise - and a lot of people may be hurt, and may die, who might not have to otherwise.

. . . .

Speaking personally, it would be a joy for me to kill Saddam, physically, up close - with a chance to savor doing so.

Don't like the guy. I'm not certain that means he can't be an effective leader of Iraq, right now - under easily imaginable circumstances. Not that I'm sure he could or should be. But I'm not certain. Bush might have reasons to hesitate, as well, if he thinks about everything involved.

lunarchick - 11:59am Nov 18, 2002 EST (# 5913 of 5919)

Italy - former PM - sentenced for 'conspiracy to murder' bbc world news

rshow55 - 12:13pm Nov 18, 2002 EST (# 5914 of 5919)
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.

This is just one person's idea - but thinking about it might clarify things in the minds of people who have to judge, and make decisions on what to print - and people who have to act.

5836-8 rshow55 11/16/02 1:49pm

I'll be off for at least an hour.

(5 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense