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.

gisterme - 11:30pm Jan 5, 2003 EST (# 7400 of 7409)

almarst2002 1/5/03 10:15pm

"...Why should we trust this president more then any other?..."

Nobody is asking anyone to trust this president more than any other. However, I will say that this president has so far given no reason not to trust him. The same can't be said for his predecessor.

"...Wasn't this type of the Government designed exactly to put a check on any power, including the president's?..."

Absolutely. That's why there is a two-term limit on the office of president and a new election after first four years. That's also why power is distributed between the three branches of government, Executive (presidential), legislative (congress) and judicial. Congress also has the power to impeach a president and have him removed from office if he screws up too badly. The last president came close to doing that. Bill Clinton and Andrew Johnson are the only two US presidents who bear the dubious honor of having had an impeachment proceeding advanced against them. Neither was removed from office.

almarst2002 - 11:40pm Jan 5, 2003 EST (# 7401 of 7409)

gisterme 1/5/03 11:30pm

so, how come no one is avare about evidence the US has on Iraq?

And, where was the media and the Congress when Clinton-Albright team engineered the evidence of "fields of death" of 100.000 albanians in kosovo? While CIA was busy arming anyone ready to break the Yugoslavia?

gisterme - 11:45pm Jan 5, 2003 EST (# 7402 of 7409)

"...The North has repeatedly said that it is willing to negotiate, and yesterday the government appeared to accept the outline of the South's plans..."

Great! They can negotiate with SK all they want. Let's hope they negotiate in better faith this time. Anyone can learn from their mistakes.

"..."There is no reason why the US should not accept the proposal, the best way for a peaceful solution,"..."

There's presently no threat of war from anyone but NK. So wouldn't "doing what it takes" for a peaceful solution be exactly like paying blackmail? I think it would.

The NKs are just trying to find a way to maneuver out of the mess that their fearless leader has gotten them into. They can bluster all they want; but, I suspect they'll have to do far more than that to regain US trust.

Also, the US is not alone in its disgust with the NK leadership. The Russians, Chinese, SKs and Japanese are a few other interested parties that would feel downright destabilized by NK nuclear aggressiveness.

Some claim that the US building a defense against ballistic missile attack would start a new arms race. That's just not a reasonable assesment.

Nuclear weapons in NK will definately start a new arms race...not involving the US, involving SK, and Japan. That's not in anybody's best interest, including NK.

almarst2002 - 11:53pm Jan 5, 2003 EST (# 7403 of 7409)

"There's presently no threat of war from anyone but NK."

An "interesting" conclusion. I am sure you applyed the "formal" logic;)

bbbuck - 12:12am Jan 6, 2003 EST (# 7404 of 7409)
"You can't eat this, it's people, it's people"-B....."What about the cherry pie?"

Congratulations to all-mist2002.
77 consecutive posts and not one of them intelligible.
That breaks rshow55's record.
But you're not even close to looneychic's.
Keep going brother, I'll tell you when you're getting close to the record.

(5 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense