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 - 05:36pm Aug 23, 2001 EST (#8064 of 8070)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

MD6671 rshowalter 7/6/01 11:47am .... contains this phrase:

" Hitler went unchecked. "

Hitler subverted an entire society based on nonsense and lies, many ornately detailed, and destroyed much of the world in doing so. He hoped, in the senses that matter to most of us, to destroy the whole world. In the ways that mattered, he wasn't effectively checked at the level of ideas.

Could the situation be as serious as that now? I think so -- I've long believed that the world could easily end, on the basis of things I believe I understand from a more grounded perspective than many have, that the world could end. I'm not alone in that fear:

. Doomsday by Rebecca Johnson , executive director of the Acronym Institute for Disarmament Diplomacy http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4222863,00.html

In MD6024 rshowalter 6/25/01 4:52pm I asked gisterme , who I believe represents high officers of state, the following question

" What have I said that is not in the national interest?"

The issue was whether I had committed, or was proposing to commit, treason. gisterme replied to the question directly in these posting, and doing so conceded that issues of technical feasibility and probablility of projects, based on the open literature, can be discussed in the United States.

MD6028 gisterme 6/25/01 6:58pm ... MD6033 gisterme 6/25/01 7:45pm
MD6059 rshowalter 6/26/01 1:35pm ... MD6060 gisterme 6/26/01 3:13pm

That concession is important, in part because of the mechanics of discourse in these affairs. The shroud of classification, even when only used as a threat, can slow discourse down to a crawl. For example, the Coyle Report, . . . NATIONAL MISSILE DEFENSE DEPLOYMENT READINESS REVIEW 10 August 2000 . . . . http://www.house.gov/reform/min/pdf/nmdcoylerep.pdf , though not formally classified, has been restricted informally. It took months for Congressman Tierney to get it released -- a release that was plainly in the public interest.

Another example: M.I.T. Physicist Says Pentagon Is Trying to Silence Him by JAMES DAO http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/27/politics/27MISS.html

Working outside of classification rules could be much faster -- and could happen in public -- ideally, recorded in streaming video on the net, with key calculations also on the net, and the whole world invited to see and check those calculations.

If this were done, and somehow made public -- some key points, now supressed, might stand out - - and some good decisions might come. I've been trying to find ways to force that checking -- with someone from the administration - with a real name, a real face, and real engineering creditials at risk - on the other side. People often will not attend to fancy arguments -- especially these, where it is so often numbers that are far fetched -- not qualitative ideas alone.

Perhaps, if it could be arranged, more might attend to a umpired fight. I might lose such an umpired, public fight, but I'm prepared to risk that.

(6 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense