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?

lunarchick - 11:24am Jun 23, 2001 EST (#5884 of 5892)
lunarchick@www.com

George Johnson said

"To alter this,rshowalter is now furthering the hostile and antagonistic feelings against to the peace among the US people through internet."

Showalter has followed a line related to MD and improved international understanding.

George Johnson -- what ever you used to be .. you've lost it !

rshowalter - 11:25am Jun 23, 2001 EST (#5885 of 5892)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

M. Robert Showalter is my name (Merle Robert Showalter -- not Jr, because an "s" was deleted from my father's name Merle Roberts Showalter --Dad goes by "Merle" and I go by "Robert")-- and anybody who wants to check in Madison Wisconsin can find me.

lunarchick - 11:28am Jun 23, 2001 EST (#5886 of 5892)
lunarchick@www.com

Johnstone - don't confuse 'ego' with 'cause'

Showalter's cause is for a world with Missiles brought down, under control; a world that won't be 'destroyed' by accident.

As a parent you also should have concerns that our world be made a safer place.

If there's ego tripping on this board .. look in the mirror of your own irrelevance .. you're a talented guy - use talent in a positive manner.

lunarchick - 11:53am Jun 23, 2001 EST (#5887 of 5892)
lunarchick@www.com

Peace

lunarchick - 11:56am Jun 23, 2001 EST (#5888 of 5892)
lunarchick@www.com

http://www.csi.ad.jp/ABOMB/pp.html

midmoon - 12:02pm Jun 23, 2001 EST (#5889 of 5892)

Sorry Bob! That must be my misinterpretation! Lunarchick! I'm not Johnson.My name is midmoon. Are you a spokesman to Bob? Since when?

At the summit talk, Bush insisted that the MD system is necessary to protect against missile launches from 'depraved' countries, whereas Putin opposed to the MD system saying that any unilateral actions can only make the relationship between the two countries worse.

Putin asserted in the meeting with American journalists at the Kremlin on 18th, that the missiles of North Korea cannot be threats to the national security of the US.

He also strongly expressed his opinion not to accept the US attitude toward the MD plan just one day after the US announced to proceed the MD plan in spite of the Russia's objection.

Putin told that ' Bush and I were not in accord (in the summit meeting) with the characteristic of the national security threats with which both countries has faced. Therefore, I warn against any unilateral action of the US in order to revise the Antiballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty of 1972'.

This remark especially brought attention in the sense that he had officially expressed his opinion on the MD system and the ABM treaty after the summit meeting .

Powell and Rice told on 17th that 'the ABM treaty, a legacy of the cold war era will be abolished when the MD technology is established. And the US will proceed with the missile defense with or without Russia'.

Meanwhile, Chinese President Jiang Zemin, who had been reported the results of the US-Russia summit talks from President Putin by telephone, expressed the token of the gratitude for Putin's objection to the MD plan, reported yesterday Xinhua press.

The Japan is reported to have the willingness to set up its own MD system independent from the US MD scheme.

Rumsfeld stated on 21st that the US is preparing a new military strategy suitable to the changed security matters raised after the end of the Cold war, the one-plus instead of the so-called Win-Win strategy,

What a mess is this!

Now it's clear that the Russia, the China and the N.Korea are going to flock together!

By the contrast,the mutual cooperations between the US and the EU and that between the US and east asian allies don't seem working well.

I think this is due to the ambiguity of the concept of the MD.

Why the MD instead of the NMD and TMD?

The NMD is just for the US and the TMD is for the US and western allies alike and the US and the east asian allies altogether.

What is the MD standing for?

Is that the MD just for the US and the Russia i.e. BMD?

My humble opinion is that if the US is giong to gain voluntary supports from its allies in the missile scheme, the definion of MD must be made more clear.

My proposal is that the definition of MD should contain dual meaning...the NMD for the sake of the US itself and TMD for the sake of the US and its allies altogether.

In that case,the NMD and the TMD can be pushed forward in the consecutive order or at the same time.

Cosidering the MD scheme's pure technological problems, though can be easily resolved ,it would be reasonable to proceed the NMD first and ,with a little time lag, successively egage in the TMD the more time consuming job.

lunarchick - 12:08pm Jun 23, 2001 EST (#5890 of 5892)
lunarchick@www.com

My comments relate to the board ... I've read it!

rshowalter - 12:09pm Jun 23, 2001 EST (#5891 of 5892)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

That's an awesome link list "pictorial tour" of Hirsoshima memorials. Thanks !

rshowalter - 12:11pm Jun 23, 2001 EST (#5892 of 5892)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

This board is hard to read -- only a few people have read it in its entirety. And it is not an entertainment medium -- which makes it different from most boards. But it is showing how communication between staffed organizations can occur -- and I hope staffs use it. I have some hope that some are.

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense