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 - 06:05pm Jan 27, 2002 EST (#11097 of 11101)

MD7780 rshowalter 8/8/01 9:03am cites U.S., Russian Defense Officials Meet by THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

" Rumsfeld said there are psychological barriers to creating a new security relationship with Russia.

" ``There is an awful lot of baggage left over in the relationship, the old relationship, the Cold War relationship between the United States and the Soviet Union,'' he said.

" " ``It is baggage that exists in people's minds, it exists in treaties, it exists in the structure of relationships, the degree of formality of them,'' he added. ``And it will require, I think, some time to work through these things and see if we can't set the relationship on a different basis.''

There's been progress since. And Secretary Rumsfeld is surely right that time is part of what's needed.

But another condition is a shared, and correct, view of realities, including technical realities.

rshow55 - 06:30pm Jan 27, 2002 EST (#11098 of 11101)

Many people, including many of the most distinguished experts America can show, have argued for nuclear disarmament for a long time. Signatories of the Global Security Institute appeal as of October 2, 2000 are impressive indeed. md374-375 rshowalt 10/4/00 5:08am . But the dangers of nuclear weapons have not been widely enough appreciated by the voters -- in part because too many americans are stunningly uninformed about the real dangers. A distinguished and professional poster, MD9901 kangdawei 9/29/01 10:05am pointed out the astonishing fact that most americans thing the United States has a missile defense, as follows:

"Although missile defense is the single most important component of national security policy in the nuclear age, there is amazing ignorance on the current state of our defense. Indeed, prior to the election of George W. Bush, 74% of Americans believed the United States possessed a national missile defense. Since the election, and the publicity the issue received from the campaign, that number is down to about 58%. Still, all in all, an amazing statistic if you consider that over half of the American people believe the United States possesses a missile defense when in fact not a single, solitary missile can be stopped.

The confusion is understandable. In a democratic republic like ours it is expected that matters of national security will be examined and explained by the president and members of Congress. Citizens assume that their representatives will be well-informed about such matters having access to the best military and political intelligence in the country. After all, they heard from President Reagan that he was going to build a national missile defense, and they assumed he did. Their representatives say little about the threat to the United States from missile attack and the absence of a defense.

Missile defense may indeed be the single most important component of national security policy in the nuclear age. I agree with Bob Kerrey that ARMED TO EXCESS "The risk of a nuclear attack (or accident) still poses the greatest single threat to our survival."

But the technical missile defense programs the Bush administration is committed to can't work tactically.

That means that Ivanov's Op Ed piece today, Organizing the World to Fight Terror , is not Russian "negotiation from weakness." It is sheer practicality.

The degree of misunderstanding among Americans, on technical possibilties, and current risks, needs to be adressed.

rshow55 - 06:58pm Jan 27, 2002 EST (#11099 of 11101)

Facts and relationships can be set out and checked. In public.

MD11042 rshow55 1/25/02 2:30pm ... MD11044 rshow55 1/25/02 2:32pm
MD11045 rshow55 1/25/02 2:34pm

It is also important that key relationships are worked out in enough detail, and explained. That will take staff work, and ideally, I believe, the involvement of journalists.

MD9842 rshowalter 9/24/01 3:57pm ... MD9843 rshowalter 9/24/01 3:58pm

Ivanov's distinguished suggestions for Organizing the World to Fight Terror follow. They may seem to some to be "self evident" but they are far from being so, in the world as it is. They have to be justified, by clearing away incorrect ideas that can be corrected by checking facts - - and explained to americans -- both politicians, and voters -- and to the other people involved. I think this is practical -- but it will take some effort, and some committment, if it is to happen.

(2 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense