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 - 04:23pm Mar 11, 2003 EST (# 9822 of 9826)
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.

Stuck? Maybe it makes sense to try another gambit - even if it doesn't move directly toward your goal - or the goal of an ideal outcome - to get things unstuck.

Or to rethink priorities.

For example, it seems to me that if Putin wanted to maximize Russia's advantage in geopolitics and oil revenue - he might encourage Bush to invade Iraq. It would be disastrous to US power - increasing Russia's relative power - and if the US gave Iraqis much political discretion might give Russia a big relative advantage in the oil busines, as well. As it is, Putin may or may not be negotiating in ways that serve his own needs - and to think that through - Putin might consider some changes. Bush might, as well.

People, these days, are getting stuck more often than they should - taking poses that lock things down and classify progress out of existence - when some more tactical flexibility might have its uses.

Especially when people already have a good deal of common ground - and when double and multiple teaming can be used to make things more complex - enough more complex that insincere poses can be made awkward.

mazza9 - 04:25pm Mar 11, 2003 EST (# 9823 of 9826)
"Quae cum ita sunt" Caesar's Gallic Commentaries

Hey Gisterme:

Who has the biggest stutter? What's with the eight to ten sequential posts by, you know who? I suspect that they can;t give you a simple or intelligent answer so there is much harumphing!

On the outskirts of a small town, there was a big, old pecan tree just inside the cemetery fence. One day, two boys filled up a bucketful of nuts and sat down by the tree, out of sight, and began dividing the nuts. "One for you, one for me. One for you, one for me," said one boy. Several dropped and rolled down toward the fence. Another boy came riding along the road on his bicycle. As he passed, he thought he heard voices from inside the cemetery. He slowed down to investigate.

Sure enough, he heard, "One for you, one for me. One for you, one for me." He just knew what it was. "Oh my", he shuddered, "it's Satan and the Lord dividing the souls at the cemetery." He jumped back on his bike and rode off. Just around the bend he met an old man with a cane, hobbling along. Come here quick," said the boy, "you won't believe what I heard!

Satan and the Lord are down at the cemetery dividing up the souls." The man said, "Beat it kid, can't you see it's hard for me to walk." When the boy insisted though, the man hobbled to the cemetery. Standing by the fence they heard, "One for you, one for me. One for you, one for me..."

The old man whispered, "Boy, you've been tellin' the truth. Let's see if we can see the Lord himself." Shaking with fear, they peered through the fence, yet were still unable to see anything. The old man and the boy gripped the wrought iron bars of the fence tighter and tighter as they tried to get a glimpse of the Lord. At last they heard, "One for you, one for me." And one last "One for you, one for me. That's all. Now let's go get those nuts by the fence, and we'll be done."

They say the old man made it back to town a full 5 minutes ahead of the boy on the bike.

rshow55 - 04:27pm Mar 11, 2003 EST (# 9824 of 9826)
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.

At the UN - suppose you represent a nation state. You're the "negotiator" and another nation state is the "opposer." Would you know how in a particular case - to choose these general approaches?

1. Negotiator works for opposers needs.

2. Negotiator lets opposer work for his needs.

3. Negotiator works for opposer's and his own needs.

4. Negotiator works against his own needs.

5. Negotiator works against his opposer's needs.

6. Negotiator works against opposer and his own needs.

If the answers no - then the odds of getting stuck are higher than they need to be. Things at the UN, these days, are so primative that many of the players might find it hard to "fight through" discussions where people were trying to meet their needs - or even claiming to.

rshow55 - 04:29pm Mar 11, 2003 EST (# 9825 of 9826)
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.

How many different ways are there to check the negotiating consistency of a position?

(1 following message)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense