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 (9337 previous messages)

rshow55 - 04:26pm Feb 27, 2003 EST (# 9338 of 9347) 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: http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.Hwpja8hc4q1.0@.f28e622/10871

If the liberation of Iraq can be accomplished with only the threat of war, not war - that will be wonderful. There's still hope of that - and the Bush administration is plainly doing some careful negotiating.

It is worth noting that the people of Iraq and the people of France are different people - and Saddam is not - from the Iraqi point of view - a foreign invader.

gisterme - 04:49pm Feb 27, 2003 EST (# 9339 of 9347)

rshow55 - 04:12pm Feb 27, 2003 EST (# 9332...) http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.Hwpja8hc4q1.0@.f28e622/10867

"...Gisterme - I think a problem is how easy it is to dehumanize and dismiss people - for instance, just dismissing them as "evil."..."

We've already agreed that Saddam Hussein and other historical figures that he is emulating are evil. That's not dismissing them. That's just calling a spade a spade. Have you changed your mind about that? Do you feel that Saddam Hussein is being dismissed? Would you like to see him dismissed so that he can continue and even magnify his crimes against humanity?

I hope not, Robert.

"...Standing up for the group is a great thing to do - but at times - right answers are distasteful. To anybody. But sometimes they matter a great deal."

Of course right answers matter, Robert, whether or not a group is involved. I don't say they sometimes matter, I say they always matter.

That's why, distasteful or not, the truth of a matter must be not only enunciated but acted upon, especially when the truth is that many millions of lives, perhaps hundreds of millions of lives, could be adversly affected by ignoring it.

rshow55 - 05:12pm Feb 27, 2003 EST (# 9340 of 9347) 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: http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.Hwpja8hc4q1.0@.f28e622/10875

Compared to historical standards - things may be going very well - it seems to me.

If we come out of this with an international law that works - backed by a substantial consensus of nations and the people in them - able to raise standards - and get better arrangements for people - that would be wonderful -- and it looks possible.

I thought this was an interesting piece:

'Any fool can make war. Peace requires greater vision and courage' Ronan Bennett Thursday February 27, 2003 http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,903839,00.html

And a collection of articles: If not war then what? includes these links - each with many interesting opinions.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,903742,00.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,903938,00.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,903943,00.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,903871,00.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,903864,00.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,903740,00.html

But of course, in the end the international community doesn't need "interesting opinions - it need negotiations that work for what they are supposed to do.

Last time, after a lot of back and forth - I think the UN Security Council did excellent work. Maybe this time, too.

I notice that the Bush administration is doing a lot of talking to the Russians. Maybe something good will come of it.

I wish Saddam would have the sense to cut a good deal for his country, and himself, and leave Iraq. He could find interesting, constructive things to do for himself - and save his people, his religion, and the whole world a lot of trouble.

More Messages Recent Messages (7 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