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?

possumdag - 09:12am Jun 11, 2001 EST (#4737 of 4747)
Possumdag@excite.com

Bwsh, the twins and Cheney made it into the business pages of the Aussie National today:

Bwsh has assets of between $8m - $19m
$78Th as Texas Gov
$400Th as President
$'s from oil
$'s from baseball divident $500Th-$1m 2000

Twins have $1m in stocks and trust funds

Dick Cheney has $'s from oil
With four checking accounts
In one he has between $1m -$5m
Declaring assets of $20m

Bwsh Advisor 'Karl Rove' has a
stock portfolio of $1.3m - $3.3m
Enron, Boeing, Pfizer, CiscoSystems

He's giving advice to Bwsh on
tax cuts
energy policy
helath-care reform
defence spending

Rove "I try to avoid being involved in matters
that materially affect my specific holdings"

Critics "If that is true, his working day must be very short"

Advised in December to divest the stocks ... now JUNE!

C o n f l i c t
o f
i n t e r e s t

ominousri - 09:38am Jun 11, 2001 EST (#4738 of 4747)

Well the arguments here have clearly outlined the problems, as obvious as they are.

- The money needs to be hand-fed to them in a means that assures it lands where it intends to.

- We must rebuild back what we've ruined. Testing of these anti-missle defenses does not in any way shape or form warrant the destruction of a civilization by any way, shape or form. What has been undone there should justly be redone.

We invented the imbalance in their lives, and it's crucially up to us as a modern nation to guide them and work with them in maintaining the integrity of life (the value of which we fight so fiercely for). Without it, we might as well discontinue stopping WWIII. Nothing worthwhile will be available to bother protecting.

Just my $0.02.

possumdag - 09:40am Jun 11, 2001 EST (#4739 of 4747)
Possumdag@excite.com

Germany - set to phase out Nuclear Power by 2018, using renewable, fuel cells & gas, with efficiency and conservation.

possumdag - 09:49am Jun 11, 2001 EST (#4740 of 4747)
Possumdag@excite.com

BwshRice

gisterme - 12:18pm Jun 11, 2001 EST (#4741 of 4747)

rshowalter 6/7/01 7:59pm

rshowalter wrote: "...The idea that the US press is a "liberal conspiracy" is pretty amazing to me, but perhaps others will feel differently..."

Didn't say liberal conspiracy, Robert; just bias according to what the boss wants. There's a big difference there. I didn't mean to imply that anything illegal is going on in the media. I only intended to point out the fact that the "flavor" of what is presented by any particular media outlet is set by its owners. Most of the owners these days seem to impart a particular slant to their presentations. Much the same way that the appearance of a lanscape painting is influenced by the tastes of the painter. The thing that's wrong with that for me is that biased information is presented as being unbiased. Rather than presenting Rembrandt and Monet views of the world side by side, presentation is of one at the expense (or even denial) of the other.

In the electronic media context this is usually done by presenting one point of view without giving anything like equal effort to opposing or alternative points of view.

For me, that kind of reporting and editorializing is unfair no matter what position it is used to support.

rshowalter - 01:01pm Jun 11, 2001 EST (#4742 of 4747)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Glad you're back, gisterme , and though we disagree with some things, you make a sensible comment.

Media of all kinds would be more fair if, as a matter of course, people covered had a right to comment on what was said. It used to be that "space was limited" -- so that was an unreasonable request. Now, memory is very, very cheap -- and it would be entirely practical for ANY news story (either Televised, or radio, or print, or on the web) to be associated with a web address, for comments. I've suggested that this might be a good (and logically incremental) policy for the RUSSIAN press - but also for the American --- . I think this might, perhaps, be an area where we might agree.

It might correct many things, and get us all more connected to things that could be checked -- and do so gradually -- giving people and institutions a chance to adjust.

This is something that the Russians and we could BOTH do -- to assure channels of contact, and self correction. Made some suggestions along that line, in discussions to almarst ---- let me get the links.

(5 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense