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.
(2187 previous messages)
rshow55
- 11:45am May 13, 2002 EST (#2188
of 2201)
Bush Announces a Nuclear Pact With Russia to Reduce
Warheads By TERENCE NEILAN http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/13/international/13CND-RUSS.html
"President Bush announced today that the United States and
Russia had agreed on a treaty to reduce their nuclear arsenals to
between 1,700 and 2,000 warheads each, and that he would sign the
pact on a trip to Moscow later this month.
""This treaty will liquidate the legacy of the cold war," he
said outside the White House before leaving on a visit to
Chicago.
""This is good news for the American people today," he went
on. "It'll make the world more peaceful and put behind us the cold
war once and for all."
Comment: I feel there will have to be more to it
than that. Moreover, even if nukes were the only issue, 1700-2000
warheads is a LOT. The Russians have talked about 100's or none,
if other details could be worked out.
"Mr. Bush is scheduled to meet with President Vladimir V.
Putin of Russia when he visits Moscow from May 23-26.
"Mr. Putin said Monday that he was happy with the deal.
""We are satisfied with our joint work," Mr. Putin said.
""When I sign the treaty with President Putin in Russia, we
will begin the new era of U.S.-Russian relationships, and that's
important," Mr. Bush said. "The new era will be a period of enhanced
mutual security, economic security and improved relations."
"Final agreement on the treaty was reached Monday morning by
American and Russian negotiators in Moscow.
"Sean McCormack, told reporters.
"Sean McCormack, the national security council spokesman, told
reporters that the two sides had agreed on a formal treaty, sought
by Mr. Putin, while Mr. Bush had pursued a less formal agreement. A
treaty will require ratification by the Senate.
"The White House spokesman Ari Fleischer was quoted by Reuters
as saying that under the new agreement each country's arsenals, now
standing at roughly 6,000 warheads apiece, would be reduced through
putting some weapons in storage and dismantling others.
"Russia had opposed the storage provision.
. . . .
I don't know if this thread has helped, but people working here
have tried to be constructive. MD2000 rshow55
5/4/02 10:39am
mazza9
- 11:55am May 13, 2002 EST (#2189
of 2201) Louis Mazza
Robert:
What did Sen Dirksen say, "A billion her and a billion there and
soon it begins to add up!" Well, a thousand here and a thousand
there and soon we've elminiated those "beasties".
Re my post on OTECs et al I
LUF YOU!
Pardon the pun.
LouMazza
rshow55
- 02:24pm May 13, 2002 EST (#2190
of 2201)
Bush Announces a Nuclear Pact With Russia to Reduce
Warheads by MICHAEL WINES http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/13/international/13CND-RUSS.html
Ivanov's positions are notable, including the one at the end of
the piece:
``Life's relationship cannot be changed overnight
by an order of a certain person who says the cold war is over,''
Mr. Ivanov said. ``There are still people who have their old
ideas.''
Persuasion, and checking , matter a great deal. MD382
rshow55
3/11/02 1:13pm
Russia's contact with NATO is getting closer in form. It will be
closer in substance as well, to the extent that Russia, and other
nations in NATO - (not just the United States) can communicate and
check things that actually matter - and a great deal matters.
That need for checking goes against established patterns - some
shown, in a very clear way in the NUNN-WOLFOWITZ TASK FORCE
REPORT: INDUSTRY "BEST PRACTICES" REGARDING EXPORT COMPLIANCE
PROGRAMS July 25, 2000 ... http://164.109.59.52/library/pdf/nunnwolfowitz.pdf
. This is a treatise on restricting conversation. In current
situations, to make the cold war over in reality, we have to do just
the opposite. We have to have enough conversation, and enough real
checking, for reasonable trust to be justified. And enough so
that real cooperation can occur.
lchic
- 03:22pm May 13, 2002 EST (#2191
of 2201)
"" between 1,700 and 2,000 warheads each
I would have thought a 1:4 ratio would look more proactively
real, on Am's part than a mere 1:1 ... USA doesn't look to be trying
- not at all!
lchic
- 03:31pm May 13, 2002 EST (#2192
of 2201)
Showalter: Our mob are inventive http://www.abc.net.au/landline/stories/s549607.htm
http://www.abc.net.au/landline/
Even so the USA most often gets the inventions -- innovation
development is capital intensive. Just a reminder that the
wealth of the USA is built on the backs of the rest of the world.
The irksome thing is the USA then go on to call many inventions -
their own.
lchic
- 03:38pm May 13, 2002 EST (#2193
of 2201)
GU - RU ~~ CU (Carter)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/russia/article/0,2763,714898,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/netnotes/article/0,6729,714876,00.html
lchic
- 03:39pm May 13, 2002 EST (#2194
of 2201)
Bushie - don't pay mAzzA for above post - dock his pay cheque!
mazza9
- 03:41pm May 13, 2002 EST (#2195
of 2201) Louis Mazza
lchic:
The United States INVENTED THE 19TH AND 20TH CENTURY!
But I suppose you are too ignorant to understand that the device
you spew your filth into is ALL AMERICAN!
MINNEA PLO IS
LouMazza
(6
following messages)
New York Times on the Web Forums Science
Missile Defense
|