New York Times on the Web Forums Science

Missile Defense

Russian military leaders have expressed concern about US plans for a national missile defense system. Will defense technology be limited by possibilities for a strategic imbalance? Is this just SDI all over again?

lunarchick - 10:45am Mar 10, 2001 EST (#904 of 908)
lunarchick@www.com

In a democratic country, one would expect audits on all public expenditures .. especially large ones.

One would also expect that were anything 'out of line' to be thought or wondered, then a 'Commission of Inquiry' be automatically set up .. and all people who wanted to be actively encouraged to put forward submissions.

These in turn be incorporated into the 'findings of the Commission' who would put forward pertinent points relative to the TERMS on which they had been set up.

Sounds as if the MD budget and the people have drifted into different galaxies over the past three decades.

The logic usually runs along Naill Ferguson's 'The Cash Nexus' lines ....

'Taxes are levyed to raise an army ..... ' Taxes are paid from people working 1-4 jobs. People want accountability.

Naill also went on to wonder if the people always crack the whip, or if the whip starts to crack the people ... as it does when 1/3 of National expenditure is paid by them ... without Audit functions in place.

rshowalter - 12:08pm Mar 10, 2001 EST (#905 of 908)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

The level of feel for propriety exemplified in http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/05/politics/05CARL.html -- rshowalter 3/9/01 7:30pm would indicate a "culture" where thoughts of accountability, for either facts or money, would be almost futile, wouldn't you think?

I wonder how many enlisted men (and there are plenty of literate ones) could read "Elder Bush in Big GOP Cast Toiling for Top Equity Firm" without being ashamed?

I wonder how many military leaders would want soldiers to read such things prior to having to risk their lives in combat?

I wonder how many cops, or local politicians, or accountants, could read the piece, and think about security rules - where no one can ask questions, without being alarmed?

I wonder how anyone can read the piece, and not be alarmed by conflicts of interest in the current administration, right up to the top. What does G.W.Bush himself stand to gain, or lose, personally - from decisions about defense policy?

Odds are, the answer is in tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars.

I think every active member of either political party, either Democratic or Republican, ought to be aware of then Carlyle Group , and give thought to what its operations indicate about the disinterestedness, or public spiritedness, or integrity, of our defense policies.

Lies, in the environment Carlyle works in, can be worth money. Enough money to corrupt 99+% of all Americans, and a similar percentage of all politicians.

Lies can also risk the destruction of the world.

rshowalter - 12:15pm Mar 10, 2001 EST (#906 of 908)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

The lead story in the WISCONSIN STATE JOURNAL of Madison Wisconsin today carries a Knight-Ridderstory:

- Overstated Soviet threat, CIA admits Agencies Cold War Nuclear forecasts were off by Johathan S. Landay

It starts:

"For a dozen years during the Cold War, US Intelligence forecasts greatly exaggerated the pace at which the former Soviet Union would improve its long-range nuclear forces, a newly declassified CIA document indicated Fiday .

An honest mistake? Perhaps.

But there has been a pattern of exaggeration, on such subjects, over many years. That exaggeration has been a huge boon to the military industrial complex. There is reason to doubt the balance of the CIA, an institution specialized for deception, in this matter.

My sense is that the level of integrity of the CIA has gone downhill, fairly steadily, since the Eisenhower administration.

Accountants approach normal businessmen, who they have no special reason to doubt, with routine distrust. We should approach the CIA, and the beneficiaries of classified money flows, in the same spirit, and give thought to their opportunities, and the ethical standards that they now, apparently, see no reason to hide.

Could it be that the CIA, and beneficiaries of large illicit flows of money over the years, are now so compromised, and so enmeshed in lies and evasions, that they are incapable of acting in the public interest?

Perhaps not. But based on what I know, an accountant or cop might routinely ask the question of an ordinary institution, or group of people, with the evidence at hand.

rshowalter - 01:09pm Mar 10, 2001 EST (#907 of 908)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

In postings #813 rshowalter 3/1/01 4:08pm to 818, I summarize extensive postings, over a long time, on this thread. A notable one, after an extensive conversation with Bill Clinton, is #304 rshowalter 3/1/01 4:08pm which starts:

" I'd be grateful for a chance to come before you, or one or more of your representatives, and explain, in detail, with documentation and ways to check, how dangerous this situation is."

rshowalter 2/9/01 1:53pm sets out

" An operational definition of Good Theory in real sciences for real people. and it applies to good military doctrine (which is military theory, built to use.).

(1 following message)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense