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 - 05:42pm Sep 12, 2001 EST (#8872 of 8887)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

And we have to do it in the world as it is -- with human beings as they are, and circumstances (including those that concern the past) as they are, and not as we might wish them to be.

MD8136 rshowalter 8/25/01 9:55pm includes this:

" The culture of some of the "military industrial complex" - including the intelligence community - has felt invulnerable for a long time -- immune from the ordinary decencies involved in considering others for a long time, or essays like FLYING INTO TURBULENCE by Peter Martin http://www.intellnet.org/news/articles/peter.martin.flying.into.turbulence.html couldn't be written, and featured in the "respectable" places where they are."

The fact that such things are written in "respectable" places says a good deal about how maladroit the United States can sometimes be, even though, on things like terrorism, it needs active help from the other nations of the world.

wrcooper - 05:45pm Sep 12, 2001 EST (#8873 of 8887)

Showalter:

Why did you write "George Johnson (Cooper)?" What did that mean?

rshowalter - 05:51pm Sep 12, 2001 EST (#8874 of 8887)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

We did not deserve what happened yesterday.

But, we have done things, for a long time, that have permitted it to happen.

And a never ending cycle of threats hasn't worked so far - - in large part because our relationships with the rest of the world have not been such that we've gotten active help when we needed it - so in fact, we haven't been able to carry out a lot of the threats we've made or implied.

If the countries Bush called "the civilized nations" today were a community then things like "missile defense" wouldn't be anything like so urgent - - because terrorism, including nuclear terror -- and including nuclear terror by big powers - - would under much better control.

The American military has some good reasons for some intense fears. And there will have to be some fighting. But if the fighting isn't combined with some more productive things, to serve the needs of he people involved, we'll be in a mess forever, and the situation is unstable enough, with nukes as they are, that the world might end.

rshowalter - 05:52pm Sep 12, 2001 EST (#8875 of 8887)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Perhaps I made a mistake.

rshowalter - 05:54pm Sep 12, 2001 EST (#8876 of 8887)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Let me go back, and take a little time, and think about the things gisterme has said.

I'd very much like to see terrorism ended in the world, and I don't have any belief that it can be done without force. Without some killing.

But to actually have a good outcome, there's more to it than that.

almarst-2001 - 05:55pm Sep 12, 2001 EST (#8877 of 8887)

My suspicions may be not too far fetched after all...

Two men suspected of links to US attacks carried Saudi passports - http://asia.dailynews.yahoo.com/headlines/world/article.html?s=asia/headlines/010913/world/afp/Two_men_suspected_of_links_to_US_attacks_carried_Saudi_passports__TV.html

gisterme - 06:02pm Sep 12, 2001 EST (#8878 of 8887)

rshowalter wrote ( rshowalter 9/12/01 5:31pm ):

"The purpose of "winning" fights is to find something worth winning.

A livable situation"

That's a stupid statement, Robert. Are you really that naive? Since when did a fight become a search? The only purpose for fighting is to defend something that's worth fighting for.

Robert, if you don't think the free open society that we've enjoyed here in the USA is worth fighting for, then you should move someplace else...

You've just insulted the memory of every brave American serviceman and public servant that has fought for your freedom and well-being...yes, including all those fire-fighters and policemen who died yesterday in NYC.

Sometimes your shallowness and insensitivity disgusts me, Robert.

...Perhaps Afghanistan...maybe you'd find a negotiating opportunity there...

almarst-2001 - 06:03pm Sep 12, 2001 EST (#8879 of 8887)

What have originaly brought me into NYT forum was a US-NATO bombing compain against Serbia.

I would define the terrorism as An attempt to harm the population, including innocent civilians, as a mean to advance the particular political agenda.

I would chalenge anyone here to dispute this definition and/or show that the bombing compain against Serbia was NOT an ACT OF TERROR.

(8 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense