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.
(7955 previous messages)
almarst2002
- 07:38pm Jan 23, 2003 EST (#
7956 of 7966)
Why We Know Iraq Is Lying - http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/23/opinion/23RICE.html
"The world knows from examples set by South Africa,
Ukraine and Kazakhstan what it looks like when a government
decides that it will cooperatively give up its weapons of mass
destruction"
None of those where after destructive war with US. Nor
treatened by one for many years. Nor under severe sunctions.
Instead, all where promised and to some extend, given
reasonable incentives to do so. However, I don't believe,
Ukraine and Kazakhstan would pass cleanly the kind of
inspections Iraq has. Nor PROVE they are absolutly clean.
"Iraq is not allowing inspectors "immediate, unimpeded,
unrestricted access" to facilities and people involved in its
weapons program."
Seems to be, at least de-jure, grossly unsubstantiated.
"The list of people involved with weapons of mass
destruction programs, which the United Nations required Iraq
to provide, ends with those who worked in 1991 — even though
the United Nations had previously established that the
programs continued after that date."
Couldn't the same people continue to work after 1991? What
kind of argument is that?
"Last week's finding by inspectors of 12 chemical
warheads not included in Iraq's declaration was particularly
troubling."
EMPTY warheads! Not a small and intentional ommision. Too
low for the stateman of a such statue and presumed
qualifications.
"Richard Butler, the former chief United Nations arms
inspector, estimates that if a larger type of warhead that
Iraq has made and used in the past were filled with VX (an
even deadlier nerve agent) and launched at a major city, it
could kill up to one million people."
What major city lies within a range of Iraqi artillery Mr.
Butler is quoted here?
"Iraq has also failed to provide United Nations
inspectors with documentation of its claim to have destroyed
its VX stockpiles."
The article mentions SARIN as being used in a past by Iraq.
How did we get to VX other then Mr. Butler's "example"?
"By both its actions and its inactions, Iraq is proving
not that it is a nation bent on disarmament, but that it is a
nation with something to hide."
I personaly like INACTIONS most.
And that is as serious a statement one could expect from
the leading figure of the major and only superpower?
rshow55
- 07:55pm Jan 23, 2003 EST (#
7957 of 7966)
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.
Search is back. Thanks !
"And that is as serious a statement one
could expect from the leading figure of the major and only
superpower?"
A leading figure of the major and only superpower has gone
on the record - inviting criticism and correction.
Of course, all nations have "something to hide" - and the
US hides a great deal, itself.
U.S. Confident Much of Europe Will 'Heed the Call' on
Iraq By BRIAN KNOWLTON International Herald Tribune
WASHINGTON, Jan. 23 — The White House
expressed firm resolve on Iraq today in the face of pointed
French and German criticism, saying that while it was
"perfectly possible" that France might not join in if there
were military action, several other countries would join in
a "strong coalition" and prevail.
If people with influence asked to get some key facts
checked - there would be plenty of checkable facts
(even just on this board) and as the checking proceeded - a
lot would clarify.
Ugly and dangerous as things are, this would be a very
hopeful time, if only people actually checked enough so
that - with some "collecting the dots" and "connecting the
dots" we could have a chance to solve problems. With facts
checked to clarity we could.
- - - -
It is reasonable that Iraq really give up weapons of
mass destruction. It is reasonable that the US makes some
changes, too.
lchic
- 08:09pm Jan 23, 2003 EST (#
7958 of 7966) ~~~~ It got understood and exposed
~~~~
Playing for those 'Future Cards'
Biggest dots - Key facts - to be Checked
Would these be the 'same' for all?
- One persons ___________ is another persons ________
"one persons junk is another persons gold"
"one persons trash is another persons treasure"
one persons freedom fighter is another persons terrorist
ONE PERSON'S CROSS MAY BE ANOTHER PERSON'S SALVATION
lchic
- 08:14pm Jan 23, 2003 EST (#
7959 of 7966) ~~~~ It got understood and exposed
~~~~
DdOoUuBbLlEe SsTtAaNnDdAaRrDd
Many other countries do, of course, describe America's
nuclear arsenal in the vocabulary of moral alarm
Sunday, November 3, 2002 by the Boston Globe A Nuclear
Double Standard by Elaine Scarry
(7 following messages)
New York Times on the Web Forums
Science
Missile Defense
|