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 16, 2001 EST (#9201 of 9204)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

I've been working for a while to set up a sort of "Engineer's Court on Missile Defense," with participation from engineers on both sides of the issue. With credible umpiring on plain matters of engineering, and with a level of explanation and illustration that would meet jury trial standards.

The objective has been to clarify some technical issues, that can be made clear from the open literature. Clarify then beyond reasonable question, so that they became "islands of technical fact" on which people, from many perspectives, could agree.

I've felt that truths, that seem perfectly clear, and to some NYT columnists, too, are not being sufficiently influential -- they remain "somehow, too weak." ... MD6670 rshowalter 7/6/01 11:44am

And that they could be made stronger:
MD7935 rshowalter 8/20/01 9:08pm ... MD7936 rshowalter 8/20/01 9:08pm

Perhaps I'm wrong, and it wouldn't take a long string of "miracle-breakthroughts" to make a credible missile defense work, based on what's known in the open literature. Perhaps I'm right. In any case, that's something that could be made clear.

Explanation is hard for people, because people "see" and compare in so many ways, and have many adjustments to make if they "change their minds."

MD 8211 rshowalter 8/28/01 5:35pm ... MD8212 rshowalter 8/28/01 6:07pm

Some standards of illustration have evolved in court practice, to produce the illustration and clarity people need to deal with things that are difficult for them, or that take serious action or reconsideration of beliefs.

MD8213 rshowalter 8/28/01 6:15pm

I've felt that I was taking an entirely patriotic position, and continue to believe so. It is not in the national interest, with both money and trained manpower scarce, to fund boondoggles that cannot possibly work. Especially when, to do so, the international systems on which this country's security partly rests must be recklessly endangered. Especially when, to do so, the credibility and honor of the United States have to be degraded.

rshowalter - 05:44pm Sep 16, 2001 EST (#9202 of 9204)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

I've been in contact with a man who successfully illustrates technical material, so that juries can and do understand it, and attend to it.

He's recently written me, as follows:

" Bob -- The Terrorists have removed the need for missile defense. . . . . Looks like the job of convincing them it wont work is already done."

It isn't that simple, as the following cites indicate.

The need to get facts established may have been emphasized now, because people are now more serious about the practical needs of real defense in the real world.

rshowalter - 05:46pm Sep 16, 2001 EST (#9203 of 9204)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

On the 9th, the Senate took a position in favor of treaties:
Senate Committee Cuts Money From Missile Defense Plan By THOM SHANKER http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/08/politics/08MILI.html

It did so for serious reasons:
Biden Gives a Tough Critique of Missile Shield http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/11/international/11DEMS.html . . . . . .

But with the attacks in NY and DC, there was a general, broad mustering of support for all things military

Shield Plan Buoyed by a Bipartisan Mood by ADAM CLYMER http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/14/international/14DEFE.html The suicide attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon appear to have strengthened the prospects for President Bush's missile shield proposals.

Bush Aides Say Attacks Don't Recast Shield Debate By PATRICK E. TYLER http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/12/international/europe/12MISS.html

. . .

But people are more serious now, and concerns that existed before haven't gone away, but may have been reinforced in their seriousness.

A Pause to Ponder Washington's Tough Talk By SUZANNE DALEY http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/16/international/16EURO.html RUSSELS, Sept. 15 — After offering expressions of support immediately following this week's attacks on the United States, European allies are showing signs of backpedaling.

Russian Aide Emphasizes Opposition to ABM Plan By PATRICK E. TYLER http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/11/international/europe/11RUSS.html

(1 following message)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense