![[F]](../_images/site.gif) New York Times on the Web Forums  Science
Technology has always found its greatest consumer in a nation's
war and defense efforts. Since the last attempts at a "Star Wars"
defense system, has technology changed considerably enough to make
the latest Missile Defense initiatives more successful? Can such an
application of science be successful? Is a militarized space
inevitable, necessary or impossible?
Read Debates, a
new Web-only feature culled from Readers' Opinions, published every
Thursday.
 
  (1331 previous messages)
rshow55
- 09:42am Apr 13, 2002 EST (#1332
of 1368) 
Some of the basic issues on this thread ought to be easy
to resolve, but they aren't -- because even when The New York Times
asks for people to look at things -- things that cry out to be
looked at, in the national interest -- it can be "water off a duck's
back". We have to learn to do better than that. And then do better.
MD543 rshow55
3/14/02 8:18pm ... MD544 rshow55
3/14/02 8:25pm
There are times when the power to persuade must be associated
with other kinds of power. I've suggested that if people with power
started to ask key questions about facts . . . we might find that
some truths that have been "too weak" might be too weak no longer.
Because of the forces involved, some leaders of nation states may
have to actually ask to get some facts set out, where they can be
examined and people can "connect the dots" -- without patterns of
diversion that frustrate any and all attempts at getting to facts
needed for decent decisions.
It shouldn't be so difficult. But it is, for reasons that are
well exemplified by this piece, about the current chairman of the
Georgia Republican party:
Bush 2000 Adviser Offered To Use Clout to Help Enron By Joe
Stephens Washington Post Staff Writer Sunday, February 17, 2002
" Just before the last presidential election, Bush campaign
adviser Ralph Reed offered to help Enron Corp. deregulate the
electricity industry by working his "good friends" in Washington and
by mobilizing religious leaders and pro-family groups . . . http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A22380-2002Feb16.html
MD158 rshow55
3/3/02 3:54pm
The paterns that Ralph Reed suggests to Enron dominate the Bush
administration -- and for short times - if one cares little enough
for waste of money, lives, or chances, they "work."
But for long term, workable solutions in a world where many
things are fragile, we need right answers -- and the patterns Reed
describes and advocates, which dominate this administration, rule
right answers out -- and degrade the United States.
lchic
- 10:25am Apr 13, 2002 EST (#1333
of 1368)
"" .... Geoffrey Kemp, said: "A two-year-old could have
seen this crisis coming. And the idea that it could be brushed
under the carpet as the administration focused on either
Afghanistan or Iraq reflects either appalling arrogance or
ignorance."
The administration of Cheney, Rumsfeld and Powell is hardly
ignorant. But arrogance is another matter. "We shouldn't think of
American involvement for the sake of American involvement" is how
Condoleezza Rice defined the administration's intention to butt
out of the Middle East only a couple of weeks after her boss's
inauguration, thereby codifying the early Bush decision not to
send a negotiator to a last-ditch peace summit in Egypt. Since
then, even as Sept. 11 came and went, we've been at best
reluctantly and passingly engaged, culminating with our recall of
the envoy Anthony Zinni in December, after which we sat idly by
during three months of horror. Not until Dick Cheney returned from
his humiliating tour of the Arab world in late March did he state
the obvious: "There isn't anybody but us" to bring about a hiatus
in the worst war the region has seen in 20 years. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/13/opinion/13RICH.html
lchic
- 11:09am Apr 13, 2002 EST (#1334
of 1368)
see map - read 'areas under full Palestinian control' - check map
http://www.economist.com/agenda/displayStory.cfm?story_id=1085296
2. EUROPE: Russia and US to speed up nuclear arms talks /
Financial Times, Apr 12, 2002 / By JUDY DEMPSEY
Russia yesterday
called on the US to make reductions in its nuclear arsenal "real,
not virtual" as both sides agreed to speed up negotiations...
http://globalarchive.ft.com/globalarchive/article.html?id=020412001662&query=nuclear
mazza9
- 01:19pm Apr 13, 2002 EST (#1335
of 1368)
Louis Mazza
"mAzzA & GI; Fisk endorses my major point ."
So What?
George W Bush supports my point of view!
Say lchic: if you give me your address I'll send you some
marshmellows. You and your anti semetic buddies can go burn a
synagogue and have toasted marshmellows to celebrate you "freedom
fighting" efforts. Make sure there are women and children inside.
Your Neo Nazi friends will give extra points for that!
LoumAzzA!
almarst-2001
- 02:07pm Apr 13, 2002 EST (#1336
of 1368)
mazza - "George W Bush supports my point of view!"
I suspect could it be for the entirely different reason?
The test is simple and as American as an apple pie - we should
compare how it will affect your bouth "net worth" during his
presidency;)
Meanwile, it seems the Bush have delivered just a second part of
the average American essential package of "Bread and Entertainment"
- U.S. soldiers posed for 'souvenir photos' with Lindh - http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20020412/ap_wo_en_ge/us_american_taliban_6&printer=1
 (32
following messages)
   
New York Times on the Web Forums Science
Missile Defense
| 
