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 (9149 previous messages)

lchic - 02:38am Feb 21, 2003 EST (# 9150 of 9164)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Alex is a Boston boy

America's pride and joy!

gisterme - 02:41am Feb 21, 2003 EST (# 9151 of 9164)

http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.DWgdaEvx3Uc.1760595@.f28e622/10568

"...As I noted before, the only reasonable course of action for such a nation is to develop a credible deterrance sufficient to make such an attack too costly for an agressor, including assimetrical and unconventional means as a last resort..."

Right. As a means for a bloody dictator to maintain his power and the oppression of his people. Of course, I can hardly think of a single bloody dictator who hasn't tried to extend his power to include the peoples of his neighbors...kind of like a cancer.

"...I firmly believe, the attack against Iraq may be jast the last match to ignite the already accumulated gun-powder..."

Gunpowder accumulated by whom? A bloody dictator who would like to use it on his neighbors?

In my view it's better to stop the accumulation of the "gunpowder" before the threat posed by it becomes a world-wide holocaust. Better to have a small war now than a much larger one later.

At least you admit that "gunpowder" has been accumuilated. That's a significant admission coming from you, almarst.

lchic - 02:43am Feb 21, 2003 EST (# 9152 of 9164)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

The Peace Marcher's have been at pains to state that their march was NOT to support a tyrant - rather - to look to a means of replacing corrupt government that isn't the mayham and chaos of war.

lchic - 02:46am Feb 21, 2003 EST (# 9153 of 9164)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Peace March-ers are next month - watch for wimmin on the 8th.

gisterme - 02:49am Feb 21, 2003 EST (# 9154 of 9164)

http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.DWgdaEvx3Uc.1760595@.f28e622/10583

"...I just have to top that off by saying though, that if we could get some key facts checked - and the implications of posters and Johnsons set out beyond a reasonable doubt - by the standards of jury trials - but publicly on the internet - so anyone interested could actually look - we could sort out enough to take the incidence of agony and death from war way down from where it has been. It's a beautiful point but also an ugly one, that we insist on taking "connection of the dots" to an umpired closure - for all to see."

Bwahhhahahahahahohoheee! :-)

Fred, you've just managed to compress all the thousands of posts of rshow55 nonsense into a single paragraph! That's no small feat my friend!

I hope that rshow55 reads that paragraph and begins to wonder why it takes him so many words to say so little.

:-)

lchic - 03:05am Feb 21, 2003 EST (# 9155 of 9164)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

The 'words' are important says Showalter .... communication is important he says ...

Moving from old redundant concepts towards new is a matter of people mulling and chewing over - and discussing all the ideas and finding those that best and better match the needs of a changed environment.

That ideas and concepts from here are taken on board by others shows that 'the tools' and 'concepts' of thinking pushed by Showalter have found a necessary place in the world of IR thinking.

Showalter, a clear and concise thinker, often says - pick up the phone - he's in the Madison Book - and talk to him direct.

He's interested in helping the world to find it's 21C order then symmetry leading to harmony ..... and wouldn't that be nice ... the world could then move towards doing what has to be done to LIFT the living standards and well being of great geographic chunks of the globe.

lchic - 03:07am Feb 21, 2003 EST (# 9156 of 9164)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

The USA's VISION for our world in the Twenty-First Century is ....

More Messages Recent Messages (8 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

 [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