New York Times Readers Opinions
The New York Times
Home
Job Market
Real Estate
Automobiles
News
International
National
Washington
Campaigns
Business
Technology
Science
Health
Sports
New York Region
Education
Weather
Obituaries
NYT Front Page
Corrections
Opinion
Editorials/Op-Ed
Readers' Opinions


Features
Arts
Books
Movies
Travel
Dining & Wine
Home & Garden
Fashion & Style
New York Today
Crossword/Games
Cartoons
Magazine
Week in Review
Multimedia
College
Learning Network
Services
Archive
Classifieds
Book a Trip
Personals
Theater Tickets
Premium Products
NYT Store
NYT Mobile
E-Cards & More
About NYTDigital
Jobs at NYTDigital
Online Media Kit
Our Advertisers
Member_Center
Your Profile
E-Mail Preferences
News Tracker
Premium Account
Site Help
Privacy Policy
Newspaper
Home Delivery
Customer Service
Electronic Edition
Media Kit
Community Affairs
Text Version
TipsGo to Advanced Search
Search Options divide
go to Member Center Log Out
  

 [F] 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.


Earliest Messages Previous Messages Recent Messages Outline (6940 previous messages)

gisterme - 12:56pm Dec 22, 2002 EST (# 6941 of 6946)

lunarchick 12/22/02 7:23am

"...AlQ's mob are said to be developing a 'dirty nuke bomb' on the borders of Afghanistan and Pakistan .... now that's a worry ..."

Everybody knows that the Afghanistan/Pakistan border region is a hotbed of technological activity, world renowned for its glittering facilities and fine laboratories... :-) ...sort of the Taliban Silicon Valley...

Maybe there will be an accidental test of the dirty nuke right there in the lab...

gisterme - 01:04pm Dec 22, 2002 EST (# 6942 of 6946)

lunarchick 12/22/02 7:39am

"...Were there benchmarking of leadership - then - the leaflet ephemera could checklist the current shortfalls ... what is/isn't in the national-interest?..."

Do you think that people who are hungry, sick and who know that they're nothing but cannon fodder and human shields need to be told via leaflets what the problems are with their government?

Lchic, you really do live in the land of Oz, huh?

'Seen the wizard lately?

gisterme - 01:12pm Dec 22, 2002 EST (# 6943 of 6946)

rshow55 12/22/02 8:57am

"...That work involved great contributions from "stand-ins" who have taken the role of senior Russian and American officials - -..."

That's entirely BS, Robert. Nobody contributed anything with the intent of being a "stand in" for anybody else. That was another of your hallucinations. You wanted to see it that way so you said it was so. It wasn't. I'm glad that you're at least using the past tense when you speak of it.

gisterme - 01:23pm Dec 22, 2002 EST (# 6944 of 6946)

bbbuck 12/22/02 10:39am

"good night ralph. The other sheep dog-"Good night sam"."

Ralph - "To the moon, Alice!"

More Messages Recent Messages (2 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Post Message
 Your Preferences

 [F] New York Times on the Web Forums  / Science  / Missile Defense





Home | Back to Readers' Opinions Back to Top


Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company | Privacy Policy | Contact Us