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 - 03:01pm Mar 10, 2003 EST (# 9763 of 9773)
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.

It has been a while since Sept 2001, but this is worth a look:

Putin the Power Broker By CELESTINE BOHLEN http://www.nytimes.com/2001/08/26/weekinreview/26BOHL.html

Russia's main focus is inward, yet Russia remains determined to stay in the great power game, projecting itself as an equal.

Russia Says It Will Vote Against U.S.-Backed Resolution on Iraq By MICHAEL WINES http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/10/international/worldspecial/10CND-RUSS.html

----------------

Pakistan: Very Difficult to Support Iraq War By REUTERS Filed at 10:43 a.m. ET http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/international/international-iraq-pakistan.html

Pakistan Will Not Back Iraq Resolution By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Filed at 1:36 p.m. ET http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Pakistan-Iraq.html

Pakistan Nervously Pacing the Sidelines on Iraq U.N. Vote By ERIK ECKHOLM http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/10/international/asia/10CND-STAN.html

France Lobbies Africa as Chirac Mulls Veto Voyage By REUTERS Filed at 6:40 a.m. ET http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/international/international-iraq-france.html

PARIS (Reuters) - France's foreign minister swung through Africa on Monday lobbying against a conflict in Iraq, while President Jacques Chirac pondered flying to New York to personally veto any U.N. resolution for war.

gisterme - 04:54pm Mar 10, 2003 EST (# 9764 of 9773)

almarst2003 - 02:12pm Mar 10, 2003 EST (# 9752 of ...) http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.ruuwaoIb5SG.1131715@.f28e622/11294

NO COMMENTS...

It sounds as if the US government is preparing to repair whatever damage may be caused by the process of disarming Saddam of WMD. What's the matter with that?

Also, considering the current behavior of certain "friends", would you expect the US government to bend over backwards to give their firms some of that work? I, for one, hope not. As the old saying goes, "No balls, no blue chips.".

Saaaay, aren't you the very same almarst who has previously complained that the US has not repaired damage from the 1991 war? Did you notice that the French, Russians, Germans or Chinese haven't either? No doubt that's because Saddam already owes them too much money. This sudden streak of morality that those folks are claiming just now doesn't seem to extend to altruism. Gee, almarst, you do seem exceptionally hard to please. Are you experiencing a bad time of month?

I'll just hope that everything gets fixed that needs fixing, since I know that you'll complain and find fault with the US no matter what happens,almarst,...even while the people of Iraq are rejoicing at their liberation. Of course, your whining is really no big deal with me since I seldom pay it much heed.

Also, WRT the supposedly falsified nuclear program documents, has it occured to you that those titular "errors" on the documents could have been due to Iraqi screw-ups? Couldn't they have even been the result of active resistance by those filling out the forms...hoping to make sure that Saddam didn't get the uranium? Now that would be an astonishingly corageous act for a person in Saddam's Iraq to perform. If it turns out that that's what happened then that brave soul should get more than a medal...if he's not dead already...and I hope I didn't just kill somebody by suggesting that.

Oh, by the way, almarst, you still haven't said what planet you're from...

gisterme - 05:04pm Mar 10, 2003 EST (# 9765 of 9773)

rshow55 - 03:01pm Mar 10, 2003 EST (# 9763 of 9764) http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.ruuwaoIb5SG.1131715@.f28e622/11305

"...Russia Says It Will Vote Against U.S.-Backed Resolution on Iraq By MICHAEL WINES..."

Ho hum.

"...Pakistan Nervously Pacing the Sidelines on Iraq U.N. Vote By ERIK ECKHOLM..."

President Musharraf has more than proven his commitment to the war on terror in a most coregeous way. I wouldn't blame him much if he abstained. Chirac will probably veto the resolution anyway if it passes.

France Lobbies Africa as Chirac Mulls Veto Voyage By REUTERS Filed at 6:40 a.m. ET

Ho hum. No balls, no blue chips. Once again, Chirac leads from the rear. :-)

(8 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense