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 - 04:18pm Sep 5, 2001 EST (#8504 of 8523)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

MD8246 rshowalter 8/30/01 3:05pm ... contains many links about this thread and what it has done.

rshowalter - 04:19pm Sep 5, 2001 EST (#8505 of 8523)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Here are things I would like to have happen. I think most thoughtful people who have worried about these issue, worldwide, might agree.

MD8050 rshowalter 8/23/01 3:03pm ... MD8051 rshowalter 8/23/01 3:31pm
MD8052 lunarchick 8/23/01 3:45pm ... MD8054 lunarchick 8/23/01 4:05pm
MD8059 frankmz 8/23/01 5:15pm ... MD8060 rshowalter 8/23/01 5:25pm

rshowalter - 04:34pm Sep 5, 2001 EST (#8506 of 8523)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

lunarchick 9/5/01 4:10pm

It is important to send in clear because other approaches work so poorly. Dawn Riley and I did a demonstration.
MD686 rshowalter 2/14/01 7:36am

rshowalter "Science News Poetry" 2/14/01 7:18am

The world will be full of unresolvable messes, until we communicate more effectively. It is safe to do so, and patterns of secrecy deeply entrenched are impoverishing and endangering us all.

lunarchick - 04:35pm Sep 5, 2001 EST (#8507 of 8523)
lunarchick@www.com

The Rats of Tobruck had nothing on these guys ... how long before they think "press" then "button" ?

rshowalter - 04:44pm Sep 5, 2001 EST (#8508 of 8523)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

The ghost of Joe McCarty is with us still -- and influential in "high" circles.

If people wonder how truly ugly "misunderstandings" can be perpetuated, they might consider the risks referred to in National Secrets, Too Frequently Told By WILLIAM S. COHEN http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/05/opinion/05COHE.html

" Existing federal criminal law states that whoever has "information relating to the national defense" and has "reason to believe [it] could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation" and "willfully" transmits that information to "any person not entitled to receive it" shall be fined or imprisoned for up to 10 years. The term "national defense" has been broadly defined by the courts, and "advantage" to a foreign nation need not be disadvantageous to the United States. The courts have ruled that this provision does not apply narrowly to "spying" but to disclosure to anyone not entitled to receive the information — including reporters.

Who among us, who thinks at all, does not have "ideas related to the national defense"? Are these ideas "information"?

The point is made more difficult with introduction of "mosaic theories."

In the cold war, systems of constraints were built up that effectively prevented any communication with the Communist countries, or any other "enemy" countries.

I believe this thread has done better than that. At the least, I believe that it has shown how better communication is possible by a dry run example.

lunarchick - 04:54pm Sep 5, 2001 EST (#8509 of 8523)
lunarchick@www.com

continuum
...

data .. information ...

knowledge ... wisdom - and the getting of

rshowalter - 04:57pm Sep 5, 2001 EST (#8510 of 8523)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

I don't know if Ms. Dowd and Mr. Friedman have noticed me -- but I've been deeply influenced by them: MD8220 rshowalter 8/29/01 4:12am

Some postings after that may interest some, as well.

We are in a mess. Current situations are ugly . If some core facts can be determined, there is a chance for working things out.

With current procedures, so admirably crafted to conceal everything that anybody wishes to conceal, and to conceal "when in doubt" , chances of getting right answers on these complex and emotionally charged circumstances are MUCH less than they would be with a simple change of convention.

When facts matter for clear reasons, and not having the right facts is dangerous, checking what the facts are should be morally forcing.

Now, it is deception that seems to be the obligation in "high circles."

(13 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense