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.

rshow55 - 04:16pm Feb 16, 2003 EST (# 9011 of 9013)
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.

341 - 356 in Mankind's Inhumanity to Man and Woman - as Natural as Human Goodness? http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?8@@.ee7b085/383 sets out a series of postings from March 17-24, 2001, originally on this thread - that were also described - with links that work now - on July 24th in 7388-7390 below.

rshowalter - 08:17pm Jul 24, 2001 EST #7388-7390

http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md7000s/md7387.htm http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md7000s/md7390.htm

Dawn and I were proud to interact with almarst , and I think we both were fascinated with his passionate, angry arguments that, dealing with the United States, Russia needed nuclear weapons. It was like talking to a very smart, responsible person, living in a different conceptual world from the one I came from.

Part of my job, for years, strongly encouraged by Casey, was to work on negotiation dynamics, and especially to try to figure out "why we couldn't talk to the Russians." Casey was clear that, even when we tried to avoid fights with the Russians, we got into them. The Russians had corresponding problems with us. I'd spent a good deal of time, working with Steve Kline, thinking about problems of complex cooperation -- and the idea of complexity itself -- partly because of a sense of those problems, and partly because of related difficulties with "paradigm conflict" that Steve and I had become interested in, that Dawn Riley and I have clarified this last year.

We were especially interested in dialog with almarst after we read "Muddle in Moscow" http://www.economist.com/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=533129 ..... cited in MD1126 rshowalter 3/17/01 4:57pm ... http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md01000s/md1125.htm

When we read that story, we imagined that we really were dealing with a powerful man who had taken time, with a staff, to do some listening. Or perhaps we were in a "dry run" that that powerful person might be interested in. And for the next week, Dawn and I worked hard to tell almarst things we thought President Putin might be able to use, and got a lot of perceptive dialog back from almarst while we were doing it.

MD1127 rshowalter 3/17/01 5:06pm ... MD1128 rshowalter 3/17/01 5:31pm MD1129 rshowalter 3/17/01 5:38pm ... MD1130 rshowalter 3/17/01 5:38pm

http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md01000s/md1125.htm

http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md01000s/md1129_1130.htm

MD1131 rshowalter 3/17/01 6:02pm ... MD1132 rshowalter 3/17/01 6:10pm

http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md01000s/md1131_1137.htm

(2 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense