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?

almarst-2001 - 11:10am Apr 3, 2001 EST (#1937 of 1942)

My view on a US-Taiwan-China triangle:

1. In China's view, Taiwan, just like Hong-Kong and Makao, is a direct result of colonial rule over China, the last reminder of this era. But the last thing China will do is to destroy Taiwan - an importand economic partner and home for so many divided Chinese families. Also, China is very sensitive to its international image and plans to play an ever increasing role internationally.

2. Taiwan plays a durty game exploiting the US desire to pick on China and continue getting US support and privileges. They also very much depend on trade and investment with China. The last thing Taiwan wants is a suicidal war with China - the mainland of the same nation and home of so many divided families.

The future will show for how long they will be able to ballance on such a thin rope.

rshowalter - 11:24am Apr 3, 2001 EST (#1938 of 1942)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

The Taiwanese position, and the Chinese one as well, depend on ideas, ideals, and assumptions of fact. It would be greatly to the economic and cultural advantage of both sides to unite - if a fair resolution could be worked out.

What prosperities and freedoms would the Taiwanese have to give up?

What compromises, and concessions, and forgivenesses, would China have to be forthcoming about?

I don't know enough to know. But I DO know that engagement could happen -- both countries are free enough for that -- and especially if common people, and business people, not just governent leaders, could talk.

They were separated, under bitter circumstances, but only a half a century ago. That's yesterday, in Chinese terms. And both sides here are Chinese, and proud to be Chinese.

China talks, and engages, international business people who also are well connected to Taiwan.

Are the people involved sure of what they're fighting about?

I bet things could be made much more comfortable, and much safer, for a lot less than the cost of an Aegis missile cruiser.

And now, if China chooses -- she has something of value -- she can show that Taiwanese, clearly -- the things that US technology cannot do -- the reasons Aegis is a bad deal for Taiwan.

Peace, on the other hand, would be a good deal for both sides.

A redemptive, entirely practical solution here ought to be possible.

rshowalter - 11:36am Apr 3, 2001 EST (#1939 of 1942)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Does China have her hands on the spy plane's manuals, and tech support documentation? And can they search the web?

Can these people look at calibration procedures?

Can they find civilian equipment, made by the same manufacturers, and in the same "family" of devices as the best operational equipment the US flies? (Web searches of langauge in manuals can do this.)

Can they look at components in the equipment, and get error bands, and dates of manufacture -- so they know errors built into the stuff, and what has to be calibrated, and what drifts, and how OLD some of the basic componts are, in their basic form?

Given manuals, and web searches for strings of words, they can find out "civilian brother" equipment to the equipment in the plane. With specs, and promises, and known problems, and facts known to people not bound by security agreements, in many countries.

All that is relavent to this thread -- missile defense -- because with this information it would be possible to show, beyond any question, how FAR SHORT our technology is from what it would need to be for missile defense --- and HOW AWARE the contractors have to be of that fact.

I believe it could be done well enough to stick in a US or international court. Or set out, subject to very complete crossexamination, on the web.

Star Wars started as a big bluff, and so many lies have been told that people are afraid to turn it off. But all the engineers have known, very well, how big a farce it is -- and have taken money under false pretenses, and lied to each other, and to the Congress. And if a great deal of money hasn't been stolen -- that would be surprising indeed -- and the program is so badly controlled that no one in the system can track the money.

rshowalter - 11:42am Apr 3, 2001 EST (#1940 of 1942)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

I hope that, when the Chinese go (in a US diplomats phrase) "all over" the spy plane, they use plenty of videotape, and take care to record the things that can give them visual cues.

If I were them, I'd invite a lot of people, including reporters for good news organizations, to see all the detail they could possibly show.

So that the information on what the United States CANNOT do can be clear, and vivid, to human beings who do, after all, need to deal with redundant information to get convinced, and who are VISUAL ANIMALS.

Pictures will help a lot.

How much more advanced is this "magic stuff" compared to what you can get, commercially, for all sorts of computer and electronics usages?

The answer is "not much."

If more people knew that answer, Missile Defense promises could be entirely discredited, as they deserve to be, and the world would have a much better chance of achieving real peace, and real stability.

rshowalter - 11:47am Apr 3, 2001 EST (#1941 of 1942)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Are the mathematical structures used in the control programs and circuits any better than those described, and subject to the limits set out, in ANALYSIS OF NONLINEAR CONTROL SYSTEMS by Dunstand Graham and Duane McRuer .....?

Dover Books -- original edition copyright 1961

Look at where the limits are --- in some decisive areas, they haven't changed in 40 years.

(1 following message)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense