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.

gisterme - 03:08am Mar 12, 2003 EST (# 9845 of 9852)

"Robert,

Negotiating WHAT?"

Good point, almarst. All the negotiation between the so-called "Coalition of the Willing" (US, UK and Spain) and the "Axis of Weasles" (France, Germany, Russia and China) is irrelevant to changing Saddam's attitude. Even the Weasles know that but they're still trying to make their publics (and ours) believe it's not so. LOL. Europeans might be that stupid but Americans are not.

Saddam has already flaunted his comtempt for UN resolutions seventeen times over the last twelve years. That's why, no matter how elegant a UN Security Council solution may seem, it is totally irrelevant. Saddam will just ignore it. Saddam is using the Security Council to advance his own agenda...and it would seem that he's somehow got Chirac in a hammer-lock. It would seem that the advancement of Saddam's agenda runs parallel to the advancement of Chirac's agend.

Since Saddam is not playing the game, no amount of tap-dancing at the UN will accomplish anything useful. Still, Saddam must derive some delicious satisfaction as he watches a once-great European nation like France dancing like a puppent in defese of his butchery. I'll say again that it will be very intersting to find out how he's doing that.

I don't think Chirac is a fundamentally evil man...I think he's just a man who's desperately trying to avoid falling victim to his own past folly. As it is with lies, so it is with follies. One leads to another. I hope that's all it is...and not something even more sinister.

gisterme - 03:17am Mar 12, 2003 EST (# 9846 of 9852)

"LONDON (AP) -- Tony Blair is taking the biggest gamble of his political career with his tough stand on disarming Iraq, insisting that he won't back down even as rebels in his party call for emergency action to oust him..."

There's the differnce between Chirac and Tony Blair. Blair is willing to corageously do the right thing even if it costs him his political career. That's leadership from the FRONT.

I can't help but feel the utmost respect for Tony Blair. He's got balls and no doubt he and his nation will share in the blue chips. The UK has been a steadfast friend and allay to the US for decades.

France is a differnt story. France in need is a "friend" indeed. A friend needs France? Not a chance!

lchic - 04:09am Mar 12, 2003 EST (# 9847 of 9852)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

FRENCH fries, toast, letters - NO, just Chirac

http://www.agonist.org/archives/000600.html

lchic - 04:18am Mar 12, 2003 EST (# 9848 of 9852)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Ch-iraq

The relationship dates back to late 1974, when then-French Premier Chirac traveled to Baghdad and met the No. 2 man in the Iraqi government, Vice President Saddam Hussein. During that visit, Chirac and Hussein conducted negotiations on a range of issues, the most important of these being Iraq’s purchase of nuclear reactors.

lchic - 04:41am Mar 12, 2003 EST (# 9849 of 9852)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Australia - Alice Springs restaurant boss wants George Bush and Saddam Hussein to dine together and discuss 'peace' at his Swiss Restaurant ....

One big problem

He can't find Saddam's eMail address to put it to 'him'.

lchic - 05:10am Mar 12, 2003 EST (# 9850 of 9852)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

napoleon - bayonet ... a little something to fall back on ... friends are better

http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/Barracks/2911/b/napoleon01.html

lchic - 05:13am Mar 12, 2003 EST (# 9851 of 9852)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

The security council's vote --- why isn't this a secret ballot ?!

(1 following message)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense