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.

lchic - 11:24pm Mar 10, 2003 EST (# 9788 of 9797)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Brilliant and insightful Aussie program on where the USA is at -- and how it got there -- and who's driving it.

American Dreamers

As US-led forces prepare to storm Iraq, former Washington correspondent Jonathan Holmes looks at what's driving America... and finds it's more than weapons or oil.

http://abc.net.au/4corners/content/2003/20030310_american_dreamers/default.htm

Check this link - these guys run Bush - http://www.aei.org/

gisterme - 01:14am Mar 11, 2003 EST (# 9789 of 9797)

rshow55 - 06:40pm Mar 10, 2003 EST (# 9773 of ...) http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.WwRdazLQ56n.1198480@.f28e622/11315

"...As I recall, the total UN budget, these days, is less than the gross receipts of the New York Times..."

If the UN's budget is on the order of the gross receipts of the NYT, then considereing the results that the UN delivers, it's grossly overpaid. Or said differenty, the UN delivers very little "bang" for the buck.

gisterme - 02:07am Mar 11, 2003 EST (# 9790 of 9797)

lchic - 11:05pm Mar 10, 2003 EST (# 9785 of ...) http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.WwRdazLQ56n.1198480@.f28e622/11327

"...Let's look at Israel. Had this place, with folks who had, and knew how to handle money, really been a success, it could have been the mecca (in business terms) of the middle east and gone on to develop Palestine and the countries close by..."

I can't help but think that Israel would have done much of that absent the fact that it has been in a constant state of war with neighbors who have denied it's right to exist since it was chartered by the UN. That the UN hasn't been able to do anything about that since 1948 could well be considered a benchmark of it's effectiveness at making the high-idealed charter of that "world body" come to pass in a real world. It's a pitiful record.

I don't think Israel's problems have anything to do with it's ability to handle money. If all of it's neighbors would delcare peace, and accept Israel's right to exist per the UN charter , Israel wouldn't need that big military budget and the Palestinean problem would likely soon be solved.

Since Isreal exists by UN charter, why must that charter be enforced by huge infusions of money from the US? Shouldn't that be a UN responsibility? Of course it should. But the UN has consistantly neglected it's responsibility along those lines. So, in my view, money spent by the US outside the UN budget to enforce UN charters should really be considered as part of the US monitary contribution to the UN.

Why doesn't the UN protect it's own political creation, Isreal? And why don't all those folks who are currently sniveling about Security Council "authority" being needed for a country to defend itself ever bring up the lack of Security Council performance WRT enforcing it's own charter of Israel? In fact, those same hypocrites bitterly complain that the US has been instrumental in keeping that UN charter from failing. Wow. How shameless they are in application of the double standard that they exemplify.

The fact would seem to be that the UN Security council really has no authority except as granted, supported and funded by individual sovereign nations, largely outside the UN budget. I think that the UN is a sham. The Security Council provides no security to anyone and the terms "Security Council" and "authority" when combined verge on forming an oxymoron.

gisterme - 02:39am Mar 11, 2003 EST (# 9791 of 9797)

lchic - 11:11pm Mar 10, 2003 EST (# 9786 of ...) <a href="/webin/WebX?14@28.WwRdazLQ56n.1198480@.f28e622/11328">lchic 3/10/03 11:11pm</a>

"...American Foreign Policy of the past 50+ years has come from The Administration (it seems) rather than from the US Parliament ... that's been happy to sit on it's hands and do nothing..."

Wrong. American forign policy has always been directed by the administration since the foundation of the nation. That's because the American founding fathers, in their wisdom, realized that foreign policy by committee would be impossible. That's why they made the Departement of State part of the Executive branch of government and directly answerable to the president and not part of the legislative branch.

You reveal your lack of knowledge about how the American government works, lchic.

"...People within countries have wanted to overthrow BAD rulers -- often when they tried to make a BETTER world, they were denied, the USA coming in and supporting and propping up ROTTEN REGIMES!..."

I think we all agree that Saddam's regime is a rotten one. Now let me ask you, lchic, who is propping up Saddam's regime?

What ROTTEN REGIMES is the US currently propping up? Would you care to list them?

(6 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense