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?

mnhdavis - 08:35pm Aug 27, 2001 EST (#8197 of 8205)

This whole MDS issue seems to be a comment on Bush II's rationality. If person 1 points a gun at person 2, person 2 will be compelled to point one back (simple brinkmanship ala Dulles). At that point both lower their guns since neither can be assured that the other will be the one who ends up dead. If person 1 puts on a bullet proof shield, person 2 will be compelled to find a way around it or through it.

Because this simple example can be taken as an analogy of the rational actor states (US & rogue nation x), person 1, the US should realize that putting up a shield is not a good idea because it will compell rogue nation x to find a way around it (perhaps chemical, biological or a "magic bullet nuke" capable of breeching the shield.

Bush II is pushing forward with a hegimonic unilateralist approach to foreign policy. Acting real tough and telling other nations what we will do -like it or not- is a bad idea for these reasons:

1. China will grow to be the world's economy in 2015, at that point having both the most population and the largest economy. Recognizing it's new status, it's unlikely that China will wish to remain under America's economic regime and will begin pushing to relieve itself of challenger status and take over as economic hegemon. (Balance of Power & Power Transition Theories, see Organski)

2. It's a well known fact that competing economies are the leading producer of international conflict.

3. Reigniting the arms race with MDS will not be with Russia but rather China and its dependent rogue nations.

4. Pushing for new weapons with the possibility of a status quo altering war possible, rather than focusing on preventive diplomacy is the wrong direction.

5. Building new weapons now increases the likelihood for war. MDS is the path to war. Diplomatic endeavors attempting to open China to capitalistic ways should be the preferred war preventing strategy.

6. Pentagon officials believe that MDS probably won't even work in the event of a real nuclear launch due to technological restrictions and the sheer quantity of missles launced in a real attack. So it's pointless.

I don't know if Bush is dumb or if he's seduced by the military-industrial complex, but either theory holds as a possible explanation of Bush's irrational choice to push MDS.

-mnhdavis

tedbohne - 09:22pm Aug 27, 2001 EST (#8198 of 8205)

ALL of the people in the know on the subject of missle defense agree that it cannot be done. The pathetic retort by the republicans that, "some defense is better than none," is what you expect from a group of people who are confident in the unbridled stupidity of the average american. You know, the ones who are fleeced by televangelists, the Poope, and other such charlitans? The same one's that vote for the very party that is having sex with them and their wallets. There is an excellent treatise by the Union of Concerned Scientists, entitled,"The Fallacy of Star Wars." It is only for people who can, first, read, second, comprehend the current data on this subject. That is, their information doesn't come from Pat Robertson, Jerry Fallwell, and other liars.

armel7 - 09:48pm Aug 27, 2001 EST (#8199 of 8205)
Science/Health Forums Host

di0genes -- If you take issue with my actions, please use my e-mail scottarmel@hotmail.com rather than use the forum for complaints.

Your host,
Michael Scott Armel

lunarchick - 06:08am Aug 28, 2001 EST (#8200 of 8205)
lunarchick@www.com

TwiceZeroGenes - note crossmaster "Weapons Labs and Nuclear Research" 8/20/01 7:01am is simmilar - yet vacant territory >>

lunarchick - 06:13am Aug 28, 2001 EST (#8201 of 8205)
lunarchick@www.com

Seduction: mnhdavis 8/27/01 8:35pm

I don't know if Bush is dumb or if he's seduced by the military-industrial complex, but either theory holds as a possible explanation of Bush's irrational choice to push MDS.

see

lunarchick - 06:29am Aug 28, 2001 EST (#8202 of 8205)
lunarchick@www.com

Missile Defence breaks down into major areas, not to be confused:

1. Technical Reality: before committing funds - do these things actually work ? If NO - don't commit funds.

Paper Pushers: Administrators (who don't understand 1. ) make assumptions .. and try to go with them ... in their surreal world.

Fraudsters: Who manipulate 1 & 2 above .. to get money flowing through the military techno complex industries .. so they can pull $commissions - regardless and get richER.

Knowledge workers: Who know that 1. is NO, but are too 'scared' by the USA Democratic System ... to stand up and say 'Look at the King!'

Auditing: where are the Commissions that look into this, value for money to voters re expenditure, in the USA SYSTEM ?????????????

The point of concern here being that if those with the technical knowledge are inhibited from speaking out - by the USA democratic system - then that system harbours lies.

The lies lead to fraudulent and wasted expenditure. The opportunity cost lost relates to putting this hard earned tax payers money into areas that are worldly-Nationally-Stately worthwhile and will give people satisfaction and growth.

The Emperor of the USA is naked - in the sense that his Presidential Concerns are merely those of his father/father's ilk .. OIL/Military Expenditure ... and to hell with both the world and environment.

Whereas the Anderson Fairy Tale Emperor was deluded by psychophants .. this Emperor knows and fully understands the course he sails, and the greedy-reasons why he takes the chosen route.

lunarchick - 06:38am Aug 28, 2001 EST (#8203 of 8205)
lunarchick@www.com

Be posting now and then .. ISP probs locally.

(2 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense