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?

rshowalter - 10:31am Jul 6, 2001 EST (#6666 of 6668)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

"Pentagon officials have said none of the tests planned through 2002 would violate the treaty. But aides to Mr. Rumsfeld are restructuring that schedule, possibly to add tests in a few months that could violate the treaty's prohibitions, a senior administration official said.

"Though the Office of Operational Test and Evaluation's report is nearly a year old and does not contain classified information, Pentagon officials asked the House Government Reform Committee, which obtained a copy, not to release it publicly, in part because they said it contained inaccuracies. (Comment: How can this be doubted, when the results come from military sources that are corrupt -- but are the inaccuracies biased unfairly against NMD, or would they tend to be biased unfairly for it? )

"But Democrats contend that the Defense Department does not want damaging new details about its testing program to be released just as Mr. Rumsfeld is preparing to ask Congress to increase financing for missile defense research and development by $2.2 billion.

" "In the mad rush to deploy, I suspect that any bad news is not what they want Congress to be debating or the public to be aware of," said Representative John F. Tierney, Democrat of Massachusetts, who has been a critic of missile defense. "This has huge ramifications. It should be part of the public dialogue and part of a very sober assessment of the system."

rshowalter - 10:37am Jul 6, 2001 EST (#6667 of 6668)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

The plan discussed in the report referred to in Dao's story have been much expanded in what can now be fairly called "the Rumsfeld/Wolfowitz missile plan." MD3108 artemis130 5/3/01 7:14am

The system proposed, and now expanded, merits a "very sober assessment" indeed.

I have wondered, and wonder again, how the "control group" comprising Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Rice, Hadley, and Armitage can avoid a fair charge of treason ?

If one reads the corpus by gisterme , this thread, and then recognize that what gisterme says must be being said with the knowledge and at least tacit approval of this "control group" -- one can also ask another question:

" How often, in American history, have such ugly and indecent postitions been supported by high officers of state?'

Too often, no doubt. But still, not very often, in examples I can recall.

rshowalter - 10:41am Jul 6, 2001 EST (#6668 of 6668)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

MD3366 rshowalter 5/6/01 1:47pm includes this:

"we should avoid mistakes that are laughable -- as the current NMD program is laughable -- and a tragic waste of resources needed elsewhere. Hey, Let's Build a Shield Against Another Incoming Threat by BRUCE McCALL http://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/06/weekinreview/06MCCA.html is fair comment about the current missile shield plans, which are far fetched to the point of fraudulence.

I'd add now -- far fetched well beyond the point of fraudulence.

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense