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 - 08:18pm Aug 22, 2001 EST (#8021 of 8047)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Interesting response, in terms of news recently and today: MD7674 gisterme 7/31/01 8:52pm ... gisterme's lines include this:

" The US and Russia are just busting the emotional status quo bubbles that have provided bouyancy to the far-left for so long. That the far-left emperor has no clothes can't help but embarass his dedicated tailors. :-) "

MD7675 rshowalter 7/31/01 8:55pm ... MD7678 rshowalter 7/31/01 9:13pm :

"I'm middle-right in most things, myself.

"Being for right answers is a conservative position.

"Being against the wastage of money is also a conservative position."

lunarchick - 08:35pm Aug 22, 2001 EST (#8022 of 8047)
lunarchick@www.com

Time for coffee? Does anyone have the site address of a webcam pointing into a missile silo ?

Wonder if MD gleaned comment here - these guys - as New Yorkers are said to be, are very taken up with themselves.

lunarchick - 08:37pm Aug 22, 2001 EST (#8023 of 8047)
lunarchick@www.com

Is world peace assured while the Poli's are vacating .. or might a webcam show a missile set to blow?

rshowalter - 09:10pm Aug 22, 2001 EST (#8024 of 8047)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Dawn, our missile controls are much less stable than people think. The controls are all very old, the hardware is often very old, too, and the whole setup was designed for a technical world that no longer exists, sometimes for reasons of detail now forgotten.

Matters of leadership, honor, and fact are important for the United States, and for the world.
MD7717 rshowalter 8/2/01 11:55am ... MD7718 rshowalter 8/2/01 12:05pm

Four short points: MD7720 rshowalter 8/2/01 1:13pm

I'll be continuing in the morning.

mitchke0 - 01:05am Aug 23, 2001 EST (#8025 of 8047)

While suturing a laceration on the hand of a 90-year-old man, the doctor asked his patient how he thought George W. Bush was doing as President.

The old man said, "Ya know, Bush is a post turtle." Not knowing what the old man meant, the doctor asked him what a "post turtle" was.

He said, "Did you ever drive down a country road and come across a fence post with a turtle balanced on top? You know he didn't get there by himself, he doesn't belong there, he can't get anything done while he's up there, and you just want to help the poor thing down. That's a post turtle."

And that's what I think of president Shrub, who is most famous for campaining with statements that he would not be arrogant, and isolationist, like other Presidents have been. And the right wing claims that Clinton was a liar, then supports the biggest and dumbest of them all!!!!!

lunarchick - 07:54am Aug 23, 2001 EST (#8026 of 8047)
lunarchick@www.com

...... and you just want to help the poor thing down. That's a post turtle."

lunarchick - 07:57am Aug 23, 2001 EST (#8027 of 8047)
lunarchick@www.com

cantabb "Science News Poetry" 8/23/01 2:31am

rshowalter - 08:19am Aug 23, 2001 EST (#8028 of 8047)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Flintstone Futurama By MAUREEN DOWD http://www.nytimes.com/2001/08/19/opinion/19DOWD.html

includes this:

" Our missile shield, more science fiction than science, has become a metaphor for our passive, defensive, retro crouch."

Maureen Dowd, because of her superb writing, over a long time, and her place as a columnist for the NYT, is taken seriously when she speaks – because of who she is, not only because of the grace and wit of what she writes.

But when something is said, where the truth or falsity of the statement is terribly important, who checks the statement to closure? How may facts be established, when those facts matter?

Can checking to closure on important issues be done under any circumstances? Who can do so?

How easy it it to stop it from happening?

Is is a FACT that the specific proposals for a missile shield made by the Bush administration are more science fiction than science?

Is it a FACT that these proposals, on which so much depends, are fatally flawed?

How can such questions be answered?

They need to be.

I think our culture is having problems with a "passsive, defensive, retro crouch" because many things are going wrong, and people have the good sense to lack confidence in "accepted facts" that are so often wrong.

When it matters, things need to be checked.

It isn't necessarily easy, or costless, or a casual thing. But sometimes, after stakes get high enough, it needs to be done.

(19 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense