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?

gisterme - 08:07pm Aug 31, 2001 EST (#8281 of 8283)

rshowalter wrote: ( rshowalter 8/31/01 5:31pm ): "...If that's what it is for -- how well do the negotiations work? And are they worth $1500 for every man, woman and child in the United States?..."

Negotiations don't work worth a sh!t if you can't negotiate from a position of strength. Just consider how successful negotiations were in N. Korea, Vietnam and are in Israel/Palestine. Bloodynial is right eventhough I don't think it's in the sense intended.

rshowalter - 08:29pm Aug 31, 2001 EST (#8282 of 8283)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Good to see you, gisterme

. . . .

the way things are happening, part of me thinks some significant parts of what you administration folks are doing is well crafted.

You're playing if for total nuclear disarmament, worldwide, with real enforceable teeth, right?

Some days I wonder, but other days I'm not sure that God himself could play the cards any better for peace.

The rest of the world was in disarray, and you're getting the world organized, right?

rshowalter - 08:37pm Aug 31, 2001 EST (#8283 of 8283)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

PS -- I like negotiations too - and can even appreciate the occasional signal switch, or bluff. But, for negotiation purposes, isn't $1500 for every man woman and child in the United States a little heavy?

I want the US to be, beyond question, THE strongest military power on earth.

Sometimes I even think about weapons design, just for fun.

But I ask you -- if you add up the negotiating advantages current military patterns buy the United States -- and the costs -- and consider alternative uses for some of the money -- isn't the price a little steep?

VERY steep for weapons that can't possibly work?

Although I must say, I think you guys can do better on your radars, and on your controls, in spots. Maybe enough better to hit targets that were more realistic . . .

Still, there IS that matter of costs -- including alternative costs. Isn't the ROI, everything considered, negative?

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense