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?

armel7 - 09:48pm May 14, 2001 EST (#3869 of 3889)
Science/Health Forums Host

Impressive discussion, folks.

Incidentally, have any of you been following the presence of former Doobie Brothers' guitarist "Skunk" Baxter in the current missile defense hearings? Somewhere between guitar chords he has managed to become an expert on the subject...

Your host,
Michael Scott Armel

rshowalter - 09:53pm May 14, 2001 EST (#3870 of 3889)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Are we killing each other, and have we been killing each other, and are we scaring the p_ss out of each other, because we can't get our facts straight? In large part, yes. And we can do better about checking.
2252: rshowalter 4/24/01 12:42pm .... 2253: rshowalter 4/24/01 12:43pm

"Let me set out a schema, in a form tinged with the sort of "political incorrectness" that often makes things memorable in a low-down sort of way. It is one of my favorite limericks, and perhaps the cleanest.

A (censored) one night in Rangoon
Took a lesbian up to his room.
They turned out the light,
But argued all night,
Who'd do what,
and with which,
and to whom.

"As stated, a nice schema-exemplar for unconsummated negotiation among free actors -- and if one is not offended by the language or innuendo -- easy to imagine, and neither logically nor morally complicated.

"Here are the last two lines, with with a tense change, so that "do" becomes "done" . Now, the result, though still easy to imagine as an exemplar of human function, is both logically and morally complicated.

(They) argued all night,
Who'd done what .. and with which .... and to whom.

The not-yet-done is undetermined, or at the discretion of actors.

The present is. For those beyond quantum limits, reality is ... that is, in a sense that is operationally important, reality is fixed, and independent of opinions.

The past, which is the sequence of present moments that are now past, must logically be fixed in the same way.

And yet, for real people, what we can know of the past is a construction. What do we owe to the notion of "truth" in the past -- and why does it matter -- and how do we determine what to believe?

We can find answers that make the risks of the nuclear age far, far less than they have been, and far far less than they are now.

That depends on finding good answers, of disciplined beauty, in terms of facts that are real --- and in an essential sense, that means being able to "nail down" key issues about the facts of the past.

We have to find good, fair, workable ways to nail down those facts.

almarst-2001 - 10:32pm May 14, 2001 EST (#3871 of 3889)

gisterme 5/14/01 7:58pm

It is interesting you decided to dig back into the events of WWII. I never intended to go that far, but if you will, here what I believe.

The WWII was all about one thing - the energy resources - the coal and oil. Remember, that was an age of the heavy industry and electricity - the source and the key to the prosperity of a nation.

Most of the oil where in posession of British in the Middle East, British-Dutch in Indo-china, Russia's Caspian region and in the US. The coal resources where also mostly in Britain proper, French Elsas area disputed and taken after the WWI from Germany, Chechoslovakia, Poland, Russia and the US.

The two industrial powers left practically without any access to those where Germany and Japan.

The Britain and the US denied Japan the access to Asian resources and blocked the sea access to the Middle East.

The Germany was denied the oil by Britain in the middle East and the coal by France. The Britain also made sure the Poland remains in its sphere to deny the Germany from this source as well.

The only self-sufficient non-colonial powers in possession of an energy resources where Russia and the US. That fact made them the least interested to fight the aggressive war. Russia was particularelly trying to avoid it, still in rebuilding after the devastating WWI, two revolutions, Civil war and the British-French-US Antanta intervention - the almost constant war for almost a decade.

The US was in a mids of a great depression looking rather inward and far from all those European power plays.

That left the Germany, devastated and humiliated after the WWII and Japan, thrown from North-East Asia by Russia without resources and the great anbitions.

The Russia, Germany and Japan had a great animosity toward Britain. But only the Germany and Japan could gain from the aggressive war. The Russia was thinking only in terms of self-defense due to the lessons of the WWI when Germany grabed the Ukraine untill the revolution and defeat.

The Stalin-Hitler's pact was supposed to protect the Russia from the West while giving the Germany access to the coal. And access to the coal for Germany was not in the plans of Britain which feared German's domination of the Europe. Hence the chance for the role of a "british gentelman" toward Poland;)

Eventually, the Hitler decided (and I think with the British help) that it will be easier to grab the oil and coal from Russia then fight the British overseas.

The US role is less certain. Somehow the Cherchill convinced the Rusevelt that US will gain some by defending the British Empire. I can only guess what the secret talks at the sea where about, or how the Pearl Harbor attack was concieved. Apparently the US got and accepted some pretty attractive promises, Rusevelt decieved the public, provoked Germany and entered the WWII.

The greatest of the US heroic Legends have begone and ended with firebombing of Dresden, Tokio, atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

After the WWII, the US tried to hold for the Asian colonies lost by devastated France and Japan in Korea and Vietnam.

The much less glamorous page of the US wars begone.

Can contiue if there is any interest;)

(18 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense