Posted on 09/14/2001 4:11:52 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Don't leave yet, I think the public is starting to notice too.
The only independent reviewer of NMD so far has been Philip Coyle, the Pentagon's director of testing and evaluation, hardly a political idealogue. And he's done a very good job, but his recommendations are routinely ignored, because he has no authority over the project. Again, if the only people who have authority over a project are those who wish to push the technology as an ideological statement, you will end up with bad results and no accountability.
Independent review panels do not have to be partisan, nor should they be. The plain fact is that this is a scientific enterprise being conducted in the absence of best-practices scientific methods and review.
And again, the reason I describe the programs as pork is because they always have been in the past. During the 1980s, there were ten major contractors working on missle defence. Eight of them were later found be defrauding the government, and by extension, the American people.
I would love it if we could make NMD work, but we won't unless it is developed as the Manhatten Project was -- scientifically.
Never underestimate a politician, even one that you vote for and support. NMD is not, at this point, about national security at all. It's about money. Don't be fooled by the spin.
End of message.
1. How does Joe know it won't work?
2. If Bin Laden had a missle with a Nuke, Joe wouldn't be writing this crap for this sorry little commie rag right now. He, and the other 8 million people in New York would be radioactive cinders. Just because Bin Laden doesn’t have the capability to nuke NYC today is no guarantee that he, or others like him won't have it tomorrow. And when they get it, they will use it. Tuesday proved that beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Conasan, as usual, is an idiot.
These are painful truths, but ones we have to accept. I support our president, but I don't support sending our money down a bottomless pit with no one to take responsibility.
[1. How does Joe know it won't work? ]
I'm really tempted here.....nah.
No you haven't and although I'll grant you that it's been "painful" to read through, they're hardly "truths." You've basically gone through a rant to the effect that: a) missile defense "won't work" because it's not being conducted "scientifically", your only evidence being Coyle's criticisms, none of which have recommended the termination of the program; b) the program is "pork" for aerospace companies because some companies have been found guilty of defrauding the government. Name one U.S. government contractor since the Civil War for which that has NOT been the case on some occasion.
And as for this howler...
The plain fact is that this is a scientific enterprise being conducted in the absence of best-practices scientific methods and review..... I would love it if we could make NMD work, but we won't unless it is developed as the Manhatten Project was -- scientifically.
Are you telling me that work on the Manhattan Project was "peer reviewed" in the manner you are advocating for NMD? Did Oppenheimer get a visiting delegation from some Beltway "scientist" think tank, telling him to stop wasting money pursuing this stupid "implosion" idea because it was too risky, difficult, and "would never work anyway"??
Where do you come up with these talking points?
No, it wouldn't have stopped the first plane, but depending on the form of "shield" it may very well have stopped the second and pretty certainly the third.
The patriot is an anti-aircraft missile. The problem with bringing a ICBM down is primarily the speed. An airplane is relatively easy.
For that matter, why don't always we have a two-plane aircover over DC?
I never claimed Coyle had recommended termination of the program. I said he had criticized the stupid way it was being carried out, and made subsequent recommendations about how to fix it that had been ignored, because he was not given adequate authority.
By the way, for an excellent history of the Manhattan Project, read Richard Rhodes, "The Making of the Atomic Bomb." Incidentally, it was really the scientific community that initiated the Manhattan Project. I think it's interesting (and very telling) that NMD has been the subject of virtually no basic R&D in the academic scientific community. There's a lot of physics, mathmatics, and even chemistry research resources that could be brought to bear on the issue without treading on security issues. But almost no one's doing it because a) there is very little scientific support for the work in terms of feasibility, and b) our government doesn't want these expensive projects worked on with any degree of scrutiny.
Incidentally, for a terrific account of the Manhattan Project, see Richard Rhodes' "The Making of the Atomic Bomb."
It is very interesting indeed, although I disagree with your interpretation of why that is -- I believe it's because modern physics departments are full of Marxists and fellow travelers who wouldn't have minded it in the least had the Soviet Union won the Cold War. In fact, they're downright nostaglic for the old USSR. Also, a lot of leftist academic scientists can't get security clearances, for obvious reasons.
I've read Rhodes' book -- you'll note that when Manhattan began, the "academics" all retreated to the mountains near Los Alamos and did not emerge until their work was done. And they had "peer review" -- they themselves were their own best (and most severe) critics. And that's also true of many of the people who currently work on missile defense projects.
Rhodes' sequel to "Making", "Dark Sun" (about the development of the H-bomb), is also well worth reading, although it's not as good as his first book.
But, being scientists, they have a certain rigor about their methods. This is the rigor that is so apparently lacking in our approach to the development of NMD. There are an awful lot of scientists who support the idea of NMD, but who are completely opposed to the wasteful, non-scientific methods being used.
Scientists generally want to be scientists, not politicians. But they also don't suffer fools gladly. I don't want to accuse Rumsfeld and Wolfowiz (sp?) of being fools, but they are certainly doing foolish things with our defense spending.
Let the scientists really go at this problem. Put real review and accountability into the process. Design a system for real world deployment, or don't waste money designing one at all.That's all I'm asking. Until then, I want us to put a "Stop Payment" on that big blank check we're about to give the contractors.
I don't think I "underestimate" them at all -- I'm one of them and I happen to know a lot of them.
But the types of politics you refer to are actually less common in the science departments than in most others.
True, but irrelevant -- we're talking about academic science departments and leftism is very much alive and well there, unfortunately.
This is the rigor that is so apparently lacking in our approach to the development of NMD.
I'm sorry, but you're simply wrong about this. The R&D done in the missile defense work done by SDIO and its successor, BMDO, is as scientific and rigorous as any academic work, in some cases, much more so. I have seen many examples of scientific fraud, petty backbiting, stolen ideas, paper padding, and all the other ills that scientific flesh is heir to in academia. And many aspects of missile defense work are as thoroughly critiqued and analyzed as the very best academic work.
There are an awful lot of scientists who support the idea of NMD, but who are completely opposed to the wasteful, non-scientific methods being used.
There may be an "awful lot", but I sure haven't met very many. And your continued characterization of the work as "wasteful and non-scientific" is without any justification. It's just your perception.
Let the scientists really go at this problem. Put real review and accountability into the process. Design a system for real world deployment, or don't waste money designing one at all.
That's exactly what we're doing and trying to do. Thanks for your support.
The problem is not being tackled with the discipline and rigor required to come up with a workable solution. And the politicians and the contractors just want us to believe that everything is peachy -- as long as we cough up the dough.
I stand by my original statement: we're being duped.
This piece of sh*t article appeared on NYC's sidewalks in the New York Observer THE MORNING AFTER the attacks. I know, I live here, I saw it. So, during the previous day of horror, while everyone was trying to comprehend the magnitude of the human disaster, this is what the little idiot and his keyboard came up with. It was SO important to spit at Bush and his missile shield WHILE THE ATTACK WAS UNFOLDING, huh Joe? F*ck you and your whole family, scumbag.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.