From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,ec3b1a84cab8fc8a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-09-06 08:11:07 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!129.240.148.23!uio.no!ntnu.no!not-for-mail From: randhol+abuse@pvv.org (Preben Randhol) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada and the NMD Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2001 15:11:06 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Norwegian university of science and technology Message-ID: References: <3B970152.4AC6C6E3@PublicPropertySoftware.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no X-Trace: tyfon.itea.ntnu.no 999789066 15521 129.241.83.82 (6 Sep 2001 15:11:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@itea.ntnu.no NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2001 15:11:06 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.1 (Linux) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:12803 Date: 2001-09-06T15:11:06+00:00 List-Id: On Thu, 06 Sep 2001 13:57:51 GMT, Ted Dennison wrote: > In article , Preben > Randhol says... >>The problem with this Star Wars project is that it does not have a good >>reputation outside of USA. Neither do Mr Bush for that matter. One of > > You seem to think things are different here... I do not know... I hope not though. :-) > My understanding is that most of the ICBMs that the US and Russia had > were aimed at each other over the North Pole. If it "lands" anywhere > ("lands" /= > "explodes", btw), it would probably be in Canada. Yes but as I understand the argumentation it is the protection of USA against rogue states (not Russia) that is the target. And it doesn't have to land to be harmful. I mean just look at the extent of the nuclear downfall from Tsjernobyl. > Some of the reactions I hear from abroad about this are almost as > silly as the Star Wars program itself. Almost. There *are* good > reasons for being against it, Such as it is easy to fool the system with flares or something like that if I remember correctly? > but no one seems very interested in those reasons. A lot of it reminds > me of the protests at Cape Kenedy when they were launching that > nuclear powered space probe. Everyone was worried that it might > explode and contaminate things. Never mind that they got exposed to > more harmful radiation standing out in the Florida sun with their > plackards than anyone would ever see if it exploded in the air. It > seems like whenever someone mentions the word "nuclear", people just get > stupid. Well having the downfall of an exploded nuclear missile drizzling over you isn't exactly harmless unless the wind gods are so good as to carry it all to Washington and drop it there. :-) Anyhow the current goverment of USA does not seem to care at all about the environment. But to promote Ada by saying "Hey it is used to build the NMD" is not a good idea in my opinion. I would rather concentrate on the non-military usage. Preben Randhol