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.
(6473 previous messages)
almarst2002
- 01:43pm Dec 11, 2002 EST (#
6474 of 6482)
Satellites to challenge Pentagon spin - http://www.msnbc.com/news/845811.asp?0cv=CB10&cp1=1
In my view, a very important development.
mazza9
- 01:47pm Dec 11, 2002 EST (#
6475 of 6482) "Quae cum ita sunt" Caesar's Gallic
Commentaries
Almarst:
As parents we try to prevent our children from making our
mistakes in hope that their future will be "better". The
denial of Scuds to Yemen is paternalistic, I'll admit. Can
they be trusted, at this point in their history, to behave in
a mature manner, (the US get's to define mature!). I don't
think so.
The history of non-proliferation compliance is spotty at
best but that's nothing new. The Washington Naval Conference
of 1922 was designed to reduce the occurrence of future wars.
That era's WMD, aka the battleship, was "limited" to many and
denied to a few, (the "losers of WWI). Germany was one state
that was not to have a Dreadnought!!! So they built the pocket
battleship which met the letter of the law. They also built
the Tirpitz and Bismarck and well... so much for "treaties to
control human behavior" Kinda like North Korea's agreement
with President Clinton to eschew a nuclear program which they
failed to comply with!.
In today's world if we are to establish peace and
tranquility then someone has to take on the parenting role.
The UN has failed in this respect. It ignores the human rights
violations that are occurring in Africa and yet finds Israel
guilty of racism! The Iraq issue is a no brainer and yet a
17th resolution was needed to communicate to Iraq it's non
compliance with the first 16 resolutions regarding their
invasion of a soverign nation were not heeded to.
Time to spank the bad kids and establish peace and decorum
in the world.
rshow55
- 01:48pm Dec 11, 2002 EST (#
6476 of 6482)
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
12/11/02 1:43pm . . . conditions for a stable peace are
falling into place - pretty fast.
Information handling is crucial - and a lot of
progress is being made.
Now if there could be reasonable controls, if not at the
level of controlling the "right to lie" -- at least at the
level of a "right to checking" when stakes are high enough - -
we could sort a lot of things out.
rshow55
- 01:54pm Dec 11, 2002 EST (#
6477 of 6482)
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.
The UN may be in the process of succeeding.
The position set out in mazza9
12/11/02 1:47pm can't last - but may have its uses, in
forcing the nations in the world to make international
law work.
There are plenty of circumstances in the world where
"there has to be a fight."
Most of the time, most of the fighting can be done - well
by almost all reasonable standards - at the level of ideas -
if checking facts is done with enough effort - and things are
taken to closure.
For instance, if radical islam decides to define itself as
in a "fight to the death" with modernity - once that is clear
- the situation can be resolved - and will be - and the body
counts can be quite low.
Modernity has too much to offer, and radical islam has too
little, for there to be any chance for radical islam to win,
if it is defined in such terms.
almarst2002
- 02:04pm Dec 11, 2002 EST (#
6478 of 6482)
mazza9
12/11/02 1:47pm
Paternalistic?
You have to take some pretty heavy obligations first to be
called Padre. Including one that value the life of your child
at least as much as you value your own.
Future on, if you read some of the links I provided, you
could learn that US was the MAJOR source of proliferation of
military technology including WMD around the Glob, directly to
the areas of the conflict and including such countries like
Iraq.
Sorry, but your argument does not seem to fly. Except may
be into your own face.
(4 following messages)
New York Times on the Web Forums
Science
Missile Defense
|