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?

ndpnyt - 03:13pm Jun 22, 2001 EST (#5801 of 5810)

midmoon 6/22/01 1:31pm

I don't know where you come from, Mr. Midmoon, but since those "junk missiles" you refer to in your post are aimed at us Americans, we have to take their owners, the Russians, quite seriously.

But I can understand how these mundane facts might be difficult to see from mid-moon. They are, however, quite apparent to those of us down here on planet Earth. You're welcome to join us down here anytime you wish.

By the way, I just noticed that today is June 22. On this date 60 years ago, Hitler invaded the Soviet Union. He too underestimated Russia.

Of course today's Russia isn't as formidable as the Soviet Union but I still think it would be unwise to underestimate it.

rshowalter - 03:26pm Jun 22, 2001 EST (#5802 of 5810)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

I think that Russia is very formidible, and if you look at changes over the last 5-6 months, it seems to me that they may be doing some things right enough that we should learn to work with them , communicate with them , and, yes fear them , as they should fear us.

Lots of times, we can enjoy each other, and be glad of differences, and not just similarities.

We will never be the same. But we can get along. It takes balance, and each side knowing that the other side is feeling, capable, worthy, and yes, dangerous.

And with nuclear weapons down, Russia and the US would remain dangerous. We could both be much safer, more comfortable, and more prosperous with nuclear weapons effectively banned from the earth. If Russia and America were agreed, the rest of the world would be able to agree, too, after negotiation and time -- and it would be a better world.

There's hope, so long as we pay attention to details, and deal with each other with a balanced and reasonable mix of trust and distrust that fits us, as we really are.

rshowalter - 03:34pm Jun 22, 2001 EST (#5803 of 5810)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

In this thread, almarst , who I believe is a pretty good stand-in for President Putin, said that even full nuclear disarmament might be possible, if other interdependent issues were reasonably dealt with as well.

That's where I think we are.

There's real, solid, tangible hope, without any more hard work and embarrasssment than people ought to be capable of.

We could have real peace, and the hopes C.P. Snow and others in 1960 had for the present time -- hopes for a world without want, with much more prosperous, decent arrangements for people, might be achieved in time. If that happened, the technical and human resources of the "military industrial complex" would have a lot more interesting things to do than build missiles.

rshowalter - 03:36pm Jun 22, 2001 EST (#5804 of 5810)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

More profitable, too.

gisterme - 03:43pm Jun 22, 2001 EST (#5805 of 5810)

rshowalter wrote: "George Johnson, in his many guises, is disgracing himself on this thread, in my opinion -- and I don't think I'm alone in thinking so."

Sounds like you're using "George Johnson" as a scapegoat, Robert. Nobody on this thread has EVER posted as George Johnson since I've been aboard. This sounds like exactly the kind of thing president Putin was talking about in his speech when he said:

"...The crimes of Nazism and its collapse are the darkest warning to all who advocate the expulsion of foreigners and people of alternative confessions, who lay the blame for their own mistakes on the latter and seek in this way to explain away disasters and difficulties. Xenophobia and intolerance towards outsiders unavoidably transforms into dictatorship and terror towards one's own people..."

Are you trying to use "George Johnson" like Hitler used the Jews? It seems your implication is "if only we could get rid of all the Geroge Johnsons in the world, all problems would dissapear". Is that what you're implying?

rshowalter - 04:27pm Jun 22, 2001 EST (#5806 of 5810)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

no.

gisterme - 04:35pm Jun 22, 2001 EST (#5807 of 5810)

Glad to hear it, Robert.

rshowalter - 04:56pm Jun 22, 2001 EST (#5808 of 5810)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

I've worked very hard, for a long time, and tried to do well, and be honest, under some very awkward circumstances.

Though it hasn't been consistent always, more often than not, George Johnson has shown every kind of perversity and malice an intellectual, willing to lie and use any power at hand, could show.

If my life isn't wrecked, that's no fault of Johnson's -- he's been actively malicious -- for a long time.

And the costs to me have been very, very great, compared to what would have been possible, with some elementary decency from George Johnson.

(2 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense