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?

gisterme - 03:24pm May 16, 2001 EST (#3974 of 3989)

almarst wrote: "...If you aggree that not, where is the media and public attention and demand for explanation?..."

In case you haven't noticed, almarst, most of the major US electronic media and is owned lock, stock and barrel by VERY wealthy left-wing liberals. They present what suits their political objectives, using their spinmeisters and talking-heads to try to influence public opinion to their point of view. They can also downplay or omit what doesn't suit their taste.

From my humble point of view, it seems that they talked the past US administration right into the Kosovo debacle; or else they just presented "pre-spun" information from the whitehouse, since it was "their boy" that was president. Either way, rather than look stupid now, that same media is directing attention elsewhere, just as they seemed to be doing by presenting that Kosovo interventaion sales pitch in the first place. A joke that circulated at the time:

Mr. Bill got tired of playing his saxophone one day and just tossed it out the window onto the whitehouse lawn. One of his secret servants found it and brought it back, saying "Mr. Bill, sir, you've dropped your sax." Bill replies, "Don't worry 'bout it Joe, Ah've replaced it with muh new whore-monica."

Yes, there is always some distrust of the US government by its citizens but please don't interpret that as an unhealthy thing. "Eternal vigilance" applies as well when looking inward as when looking outward; it's a kind of open distrust that tends toward keeping the government honest. In spite of that fact that there's plenty of room for skulduggary within the US government, elected officials REALLY ARE ACCOUNTABLE to their constituants when election day comes around.

rshowalter - 03:31pm May 16, 2001 EST (#3975 of 3989)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

A very good book, that Russians ought to study, is

HOW THE WEST GREW RICH: The economic transformation of the industrial world by Natan Rosenberg and L.E.Birdzell, Jr.

Although economic history contains a lot of ugliness, exploitation doesn't explain much about how the richest economies got that way. Skills in complex cooperation explain more.

rshowalter - 03:36pm May 16, 2001 EST (#3976 of 3989)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

almarst-2001 5/16/01 3:20pm

sounds pretty sensible -- but I wouldn't say "not a penny more" -- the US can afford some margin, for one thing. For another, the US needs to handle transitions smoothly -- and that means reductions in military expenditure -- which make a lot of sense, have to happen gradually, and in managed ways.

But it is not in the interest of the US citizens to have the military making fights when it doesn't need to.

And the US is rich enough that it ought to be accountable for its actions.

almarst-2001 - 04:10pm May 16, 2001 EST (#3977 of 3989)

rshowalter 5/16/01 3:36pm

"But it is not in the interest of the US citizens to have the military making fights when it doesn't need to. "

But since it does so anyway, there are some who at least expect to benefit from those. It will be even worth to assume the US military and the government are just totaly incompetent or sadists.

The military has a very clear desire to expand and increase its influence and the power - just as any other organisation does. and the military controls the intelligence to influence the government. And the Defense industry who benefitrs from the military expansion also lobbies the government hard and to distort the picture to "advocate the military's need".

And there is nothing better then a "little successful war" to justify all this.

The motivation of the media, liberal or not, is less clear. How much of the NYT is owned by a GE which benefits the most from the arms sales?

What the "founding fathers" did not expect is a power of a mass media and the ability to manipulate it behind the scene.

If the military expansion and the aggression has no cost to most and even great benefits to some, what will prevent it, no matter the kind of Administration.

As Mad. Albright mentioned on the arguments on bombing of Serbia: "What for do we have such a fine military if we can't use it?"

(12 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense