New York Times on the Web Forums Science

Missile Defense

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.

almarst2020 - 07:05pm Apr 28, 2002 EST (#1845 of 1866)

"Why is the United States a "super power"? Why is the United States the "lone" super power today? "

In large part - the pure luck. Geographical detachement and natural berders of two oceans. Friendly and weak neighbors. Plenty of natural resources. Plenty of free underdeveloped living space. Plenty of disasters abroad which brought in the very good human capital ready to work for the very low compensation.

In large part - good socio-economical foundation. Large middle class. Separation of religion from the government. Solid and relatively independent judicial system.

In large part - opportunism, pragmatism and agressiveness of the ruling elite. Worshiping the one and ond only God - the $ and the self-interest. And spreading this inspiration accross the majority of the population.

The events of the last Century can't be replayed. But the tendencies stay and project into the future.

"Colonizing the Galaxy in Eight Easy Steps" I would let Mr. Savage to spend some time in one of the underdeveloped countries first. May be he can come up with some "easy steps" to solve the real World's problems. What problems the colonization of the Galaxy is suppose to solve? And who is going to bear the cost?

The most importand part of the planing and budgeting is prioratization.

almarst2020 - 07:25pm Apr 28, 2002 EST (#1846 of 1866)

Bush struggles with 'foreign policy stuff' - http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/journalist/story/0,7792,691137,00.html

"In an aggressive, back-to-basics speech in Lexington, Virginia, Mr Bush restated and revived some established themes. Back on the agenda again, for instance, was the "axis of evil" that he first revealed to a startled world last January. He did not single out Iraq, Iran and North Korea by name this time. But when he described the "mad ambitions" of a "small number of outlaw regimes" that possess nuclear weapons, he was presumably not referring to Britain or France.

Mr Bush repeated his hegemoniacal mantra that, in the battle against global terrorism, "nations must choose - they are with us, or they're with the terrorists". He claimed for his policy a high moral purpose, aimed at bolstering "the dignity and value of every individual" in what, under American guidance, would become "a better world". And he warned that the US would readily resort to military means to "defeat the threats against our country and the civilised world" - without identifying the "uncivilised" bits.

There was a time, not so long ago, when this sort of language from an American political leader would be discounted abroad as mere demagoguery, aimed perhaps at winning an election.

The problem nowadays, the world has learned, is that Mr Bush really believes this stuff. It may be simplistic, superficial nonsense; it may be harmful to international stability and mature dialogue between nations; it may indeed be counter-productive, having the effect of alienating and alarming friendly countries and antagonising potential enemies. To non-American ears, it certainly sounds arrogant and foolish in the extreme. But it has become the "Bush doctrine" and as such, it is official US policy, and everybody has to deal with it.

What is permissible to hear from a six-pack Loe may be lough at when come from the leading American journalist. But really frightening when become a Presidential Doctrine.

rshow55 - 07:27pm Apr 28, 2002 EST (#1847 of 1866)

Priorities are clearer if people can see the needs, and see the suffering.

That isn't always enough, but it helps.

The most important things to do are the things that matter for people.

Here are some basic, universal relationships that we need to take into account -- and that make our opportunities clear.

Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs: Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs by William G. Huitt
Essay and Image: http://chiron.valdosta.edu/whuitt/col/regsys/maslow.html

MD66-667 rshow55 3/18/02 11:20am

If we look at the basics, we'll have our hands full, but have jobs that we ought to be able to do.

For the money now squandered on "missile defense" that can't possibly work, we could do a lot

lchic - 07:30pm Apr 28, 2002 EST (#1848 of 1866)
Mix a little GU.com with NYT.com - NET the wider perspective!

Log cabin to Whitehouse - not any more !

America is the most unequal society in the industrialised West. The richest 20 per cent of Americans earn nine times more than the poorest 20 per cent, a scale of inequality half as great again as in Japan, Germany and France. At the very top of American society, incomes and wealth have reached stupendous proportions. The country boasts some three million millionaires, and the richest 1 per cent of the population hold 38 per cent of its wealth, a concentration more marked than in any comparable country. This inequality is the most brutal fact of American life. Nor is it excused by more mobility and opportunity than other societies, America's great conceit. The reality is that US society is polarising and its social arteries hardening. The sumptuousness and bleakness of the respective lifestyles of rich and poor represent a scale of difference in opportunity and wealth that is almost medieval - and a standing offence to the American expectation that everyone has the opportunity for life, liberty and happiness.

rshow55 - 07:31pm Apr 28, 2002 EST (#1849 of 1866)

almarst2020 4/28/02 7:25pm . . . there are limits to US power, and the power of presidents, and other nations need to look carefully at them, and establish reasonable controls.

Deference to the good judgement and good will of the United States used to be assumed among very many peoples. That deference is declining pretty fast - - and adjustments are being made.

(17 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense