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 - 11:55am Aug 2, 2001 EST (#7717 of 7773)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Questions of America's "leadership," and role in the world are now involved in issues of technical credibility and good faith.

- Noblesse Oblige by THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/31/opinion/31FRIE.html

- Soul Brother by THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/29/opinion/29FRIE.html

- Nuclear Arms Still Keep the Peace by ROBERT S. McNAMARA and THOMAS GRAHAM Jr. http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/15/opinion/15MCNA.html

- Nuclear Testing and National Honor by RICHARD BUTLER http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/13/opinion/13BUTL.html

Moreover, the missile defense work exists in a human and organizational context, and the widespread expression of views like this make issues of credibility and good faith especially important -- because they condition what "trust of the United States" can reasonably mean.

- FLYING INTO TURBULENCE by Peter Martin http://www.intellnet.org/news/articles/peter.martin.flying.into.turbulence.html

Issues of competence, credibility, and honor, that are essential to the military posture of the United States, are at stake here.
MD7052 rshowalter 7/15/01 12:22pm

rshowalter - 12:05pm Aug 2, 2001 EST (#7718 of 7773)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

The technical facts about anti-missile technology, both space based, and land based, are important if the United States and other nations are to take reasonable action. These facts don't necessarily change how people feel, or how they vote, until they are explained. Then, diffusion of ideas can take time. Different amounts of time with different people, in different contexts. But these facts need to be explained. Both domestically, and internationally, because these are issues that matter to the whole world.

gisterme , who raised the issue, and who so clearly represents the Bush administration MD6826 rshowalter 7/10/01 8:11am . . should answer the question in MD7672 rshowalter 7/31/01 8:38pm .. and respond to the points in

MD7712 rshowalter 8/1/01 3:00pm ... MD7713 rshowalter 8/1/01 3:03pm
MD7714 rshowalter 8/1/01 3:34pm ... MD7715 rshowalter 8/1/01 6:18pm

Issues of competence, credibility, and honor, that are essential to the military posture of the United States, are at stake here.

hoplite3 - 12:57pm Aug 2, 2001 EST (#7719 of 7773)

rshowalter 8/2/01 12:05pm

I can't even figure out which side of the argument you are on. Try short simple declarative sentences that tell us something clear.

rshowalter - 01:13pm Aug 2, 2001 EST (#7720 of 7773)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

1. I'm on the side of increased safety, first for the United States, but considering the needs of people in the rest of the world, too.

2. If missile defense works to increase the security of the United States, either as a "negotiating chip" or as a real system, and if missile defense is worth the opportunity cost, then I'm for it.

3. Otherwise, I'm against it.

4. No matter how nice the "idea" of missile defense may seem to be, it has to be technically possible, or it is a waste of scarce resources, including money, time, and talent.

3. If you look at "missile defense" proposals from the perspective of words and commercial artist renderings, it can look very good. But when the numbers connected to many of the technical tasks to be done are set out, the technical proposals are impossible. To show that involves details. This thread has dealt with some, though not all, of these details.

4. The technical impossibility of lasar weapons, as real destructive weapons, is particularly clear. The points are set out in

MD7712 rshowalter 8/1/01 3:00pm ... MD7713 rshowalter 8/1/01 3:03pm
MD7714 rshowalter 8/1/01 3:34pm ... MD7715 rshowalter 8/1/01 6:18pm

rshowalter - 01:38pm Aug 2, 2001 EST (#7721 of 7773)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

hoplite3 - -- spent some time searching your postings around the NYT forums. I think you're crazy in spots, but entertaining and sharp.

I'm a conservative myself. I'm for right answers.

Any lack of clarity in my post just above?

(52 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense