New York Times Readers Opinions
The New York Times

Home
Job Market
Real Estate
Automobiles
News
International
National
Washington
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
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 (8083 previous messages)

rshow55 - 08:43am Jan 26, 2003 EST (# 8084 of 8090) Delete Message
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.

Gisterme has said some things that are so biased, so crazy, so inconsistent with facts that can be checked that it makes no sense to trust him - - and a lot of people besides me suspect that gisterme is President of the United States.

That's a matter that should be checked.

Pardon me for moving slowly, and not instantly responding to every word posted by gisterme . I'm doing my duty, as best I can, within my limitations. Gisterme's view of the West's conflict with Islam is so muddled, biased, and wrong that it is very, very, very dangerous. Gisterme , should look at the facts he ought to know - and has an obligation to look at - and "connect the dots" more carefully. He's risking many, many too many lives on the basis of stupid oversimplifications.

( http://www.mrshowalter.net/bhmath , a link that was removed by someone other than me, and then reinstated, is only partly tangential to this thread - it was and is involved in efforts to accomplish one of the jobs I was given by the government in the early 1970's - and strongly encouraged to do by Casey. This thread is a big part of my effort to accomplish other parts - involved with issues of international stability and negotiation. )

There are "stumps" and inflexibilities in our systems - we're at a time "when the foundations are shaking" http://www.mrshowalter.net/sermon.html - - but some of the inflexibilities are softening - and some problems that matter a lot, in a lot of ways, seem like they may be getting solved.

If we work carefully now - the incidence of agony and death from war can be much reduced - and if we give blind trust to anyone - rather than check for ourselves -- the world could become much worse. Given the forces at play - it could even end. We have an obligation to be careful.

James Slatton, who gave the sermon When the Foundations are Shaking http://www.mrshowalter.net/sermon.html just retired - and a lot of ceremony happened, because he was so appreciated. There is a vacancy - he'll be hard to replace - but for now, some of the 23 ordained ministers who attend River Road Church will take turns preaching. Many of them have academic positions teaching theology.

It is a time to be careful - - and think about what the Golden Rule has to mean - considered in detail. There are some deficits about that - serious ones - in the Middle East - from all sides - and in the Bush administration. We have to do better - because this is a time of hope - and things are very dangerous. http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md01000s/DetailNGR.htm

lchic - 08:45am Jan 26, 2003 EST (# 8085 of 8090)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

http://news.bbc.co.uk/

commondata - 09:03am Jan 26, 2003 EST (# 8086 of 8090)

#8082 rshow, re. important Johnson posting "This is George Johnson this time..."

Wrcooper followed his joke up immediately with "Lighten up, folks. You may be taking yourselves a little too seriously."

That may still be good advice. Most of the identities of posters on this board have been ascribed to various world leaders or NYT columnists at one point or another. Even if you believe that to be true (which I don't), the anonymity of these boards means that the concept of 'plausible deniability' makes any such assumptions look ridiculous. I suppose it's a fun game. Up to a point ... ?

lchic - 09:11am Jan 26, 2003 EST (# 8087 of 8090)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Wrcooper said he worked in Chicago ... when i told Showalter to go in the building and ASK about him ... he came back to advise he had no connection there except he was a supposed ISP customer of the company. Wrcooper = = Johnston. As is Kalteraunch, Rottenburg, Mazza, .... and all those other monikers utilised by him ... the guy's heading for an entry under 'TheMostMonikeredMan' in the GuinessBookOfRecords.

lchic - 09:13am Jan 26, 2003 EST (# 8088 of 8090)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

TALKING POINT BBC http://news.bbc.co.uk/

War on Iraq? Is there enough evidence? Ask a US Senator

More Messages Recent Messages (2 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Email to Sysop  Your Preferences  Logout

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





Home | Back to Readers' Opinions Back to Top


Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company | Privacy Policy | Contact Us