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.

nilent - 11:24pm Jun 12, 2000 EST (#79 of 11858)
"If this were a dictatorship; it'd be a heck of a lot easier......just so long as I'm the dictator". 12.18.00 THIEF IN CHIEF: BUSH (trying to make a "funny")

The following post/link exposes the sheer stupidity and utter absurdity of our "Missile Defense" proposals. A complete absolute abomination of common sense in the name of feeding a greedy "defense" establishment. Shame!

jemoyer - 08:26pm May 29, 2000 EDT (#16 of 78) life is not meant to be a slow form of suicide

Here's a link to an interesting article on the debate over whether the nuclear threat of "rogue" states (e.g., N. Korea) can be contained.

http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14527-2000May26.html

vic.hernandez - 09:26pm Jun 14, 2000 EST (#80 of 11858)

To the various arguments against an ABM syatem:

1) Accuracy problems, that is we won't hit everything we need to. So, because I can't protect my family against every danger, I will not try to protect them against any. I will just depend on the kindness of strangers and hope for the best.

2) Detection problems, that is we won't be able to detect everthing inbound. Again, since I can't detect all dangers to my family, I will not try to protect them against any. I will continue to depend on the kindness of strangers and hope for the best.

3) Fallout problems. The weapon has to go off first, and the fireball has to touch the ground for the type and amount of fallout you envision. The nuclear fallout of a high altitude airburst is much less than that of a ground burst. As the SCUD attacks in the Gulf War showed, there is quite a hole in the ground when 2 tons of mass hit the earth from a high altitude. That hole is nothing compared to the hole of a 500 kiloton explosion.

4) Proliferation. I should hope so if the system proves out. At no point in the near future could it ovecome a conserted effort of an opponent such as the Soviet Union, but it can put a dent in a lesser armed opponent.

5) Cost, it will cost a lot of money. No kidding. This type of system will push the envelope. New technologies and new ways of using old will be developed. You think Intel, Boeing or any other company just creates the wonderful things they make without the expenditure of money, or the commitment of effort and resources?

6) Our true mission is to improve relationships. Prior to the Gulf War we had a reasonable relationship with Iraq, that didn't stop us from going to war. Just because you feel good towards someone, doesn't mean that you will never be in conflict with him. In the final analisys, there are predeators out there beyond the light of the campfire. It does no good to just put our neck on the choping block, hand an axe to our oponents and then hope for the best.

7) A missle isn't the only way to deliver a weapon of msss destruction (WMD). You are absolutely correct. So, short of creating a policy stating that we will bomb the hell out of anyone else who develops such weapons, or appears to be developing such weapons, what concrete steps do you propose. Shall we stop all inbound packages 200 miles from our borders until they are totoally inspoected against all WMD threats? Shall we quarantine all incomming visitors for X amount of time to be sure they aren't suicide plague carriers?

This subject is too important to play emotional games. It requires practical steps and solutions, not feel good statements about how it would be much better for us to just get along.

fredp181 - 10:42pm Jun 14, 2000 EST (#81 of 11858)

How many people, could we afford to lose in a nuclear attack, before we decide to defend ourselves?....

(11777 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense