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 - 09:03am May 12, 2001 EST (#3743 of 3759)

knab69 5/12/01 2:07am

rshowalter 5/12/01 6:01am - "knab69 - makes a constructive comment, it seems to me."

Constructive? It depends what kind of "construction" comes out of it.

"Since when do we have our military run by other self-serving nations?"

Indeed. Except may be by the British during and right after the WWII.

"People need to realize that the U.S. can pursue a rational missile defense program, one targeting "rogue" nations- who will not have long range weapons in the foreseeable future"

1. You must make a credible case there are indeed such thing as a "rogue" nation willing to commit irrational and unprovoked suicide by attacking the US. On the other hand, there are plenty of examples of US attacking the foregn countries and NOT IN SELF-DEFENSE.

2. If those "rogue" nation nevertheless exists BUT "will not have long range weapons in the foreseeable future" - What MD do you need? Its hard to have it both ways.

"and not preventing other major powers second-strike capabiliity."

1. Once in place and if using a lasers, how anyone would know to measure the MD capability? Who would monitor or prevent the system upgrade? I would not count on US military to disclose the MD true capabilities.

2. It seems you discount the possibility of US making the first strike eliminating most of the other scountry's attacking capability. The remaining fiew missiles will then face the MD. If I would be a foregn power, I would not discount such a scenario. Don't tell me the US democracy will prevent someone in a White House to press the button if he will be assured by generals they can prevent any retaliation.

"The other nations' major problem with that is DISCLOSURE- are you listening Russia? Its called "tit-for-tat" relations policy. Quit the proliferation to 3rd world countries and we might bend more of an ear. The same goes for China."

The US is by far the major arms supplier of the World. The countries like Turkey and Saudi Arabia possess the most modern US military aicrafts like F-15, capable to strike the Israel, for example. What's the difference?

"BTW, SALT II is void as the USSR no longer exists, see 'rebus sic stantibus'."

There is always a way to bend a law if you have a power. Does it make any differense? The key issue is intention. And this is pretty clear to anyone.

BTW, the US attacked the Yugoslavia against the existing International law (don't blaim the USSR). The NATO broke its own charter on the way. They used DU and cluster munitions, blew-up the civilian infrastructure including water facilities, bridges, power stations, schools and even hospitals of the country which did not attack any of its neighbors, dropping more bombs then did Germany during WWII and causing hundreds of civilian deads.

possumdag - 09:40am May 12, 2001 EST (#3744 of 3759)
Possumdag@excite.com

Interesting the way the USA is happy to drop bombs by the million .. as they did over LAOS, yet not clean them up!

The additional problem is that some bombs contain contaminents - yet they won't admit it.

Bomb dropping follows on from the gun-slinging cowboy mentality, that is the American psychic.

possumdag - 10:29am May 12, 2001 EST (#3745 of 3759)
Possumdag@excite.com

zxw did you noticed you bombed the board twice ?

zxw2001 - 10:39am May 12, 2001 EST (#3746 of 3759)

sorry! I tried post my message a few times, but they always is cuted down before the end, I dont know why? so I deleted them!

(13 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense