- This topic has 1 reply, 14 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Like I said Roark, You’re incredibly naive and/or misinformed about this war and now about other assumptions…In spite of my father’s military, police and intelligence background he has known when to question authority–Something the “fumbling idiots” that believed “curveball” in the intelligence community obviously didn’t ALL choose to do (because some SURELY did question)…Another erroneous assumption on your part…I said he has been in the intelligence community, I didn’t say where, when and for whom–you did guess one part correctly, he did serve the US for many years…and I can assure you that he would have laughed at the thought of accepting this kid’s story to start a war…
story about “curveball”
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/01/60minutes/main3440577.shtmlAre they now “fumbling idiots” or “liars.” You can’t have it both ways. and there you go again… I am naive and misinformed because I disagree with you. The debate to go to war is over, your side lost. Now America has to fight and win… and we are winning. I know that hurts to hear.
Just like in anything there are some that have been more of one thing than another–this administration has had it’s share of liars and well meaning, but misinformed blind followers! But that the American public was lied to, that is UNDENIABLE! As far as America winning, that’s what they kept saying about Vietnam or do you still think we “won” there too? Our disagreement doesn’t hurt me, what hurts me are the men & women dying and being injured on both sides…You might try thinking about someone else other than yourself for two seconds and while you’re at it, put yourself in their shoes instead of flaunting that “superior invader mentality” you can’t seem to shake off…NO ONE wins in a war, but at least when one is faught for a just cause then, “vale la pena…” (it’s worth the pain…)….
We’re winning? Are you kidding? Nobody is winning this war, and the plans are that we will be there for the next 20 years. I don’t know how you can consider yourself informed and intelligent and still support this genocide and occupation.
Not to totally change the subject, or to diminish what you have said, Rebeca, but there are inherit risks for every undertaking. The challenger tragedy was part of a calculated risk. When NASA built the orbiters, they added one more shuttle to the order. They calculated the probability one would be lost in a disaster. Two were lost. The shuttle program had a life expectancy that was based on losing one during its programed life. The Astronauts were always aware of the risks of flying the shuttle.
This does not make it any easier to swallow the loss of human life. Technology and exploration have always come at a cost. It is a price that is paid, sometimes too dearly, in order to advance science. We hold life as precious, and no one wants anyone to die. The Technology that goes into the space program is very complicated, and protecting life was always a consideration. We have lost less lives than the Soviet program, according to what I’ve read. We have always known that space exploration should be performed by unmanned vehicles, but the public wants to have a human face to it, thereby supporting its future. Unmanned exploration is not something that will hold the public’s interest very long.
I know it seems like we are playing with lives to have a program that reaches for the stars. Man has always wanted to test new frontiers, and with it comes this risk. Some will say it is a selfish, nationalistic goal, to reach out in space. Others will support it from a scientific viewpoint. This does not make it right or wrong, unless you think the cost is too high if even one life is lost. Throughout history, wars, natural disasters and dumb science has sacrificed many people. We have to step back, count the cost, and see if the benefit outweighs that sacrifice. It is also a matter of respecting those who make the choice, knowing what the consequences could be. These are the brave among us, who step out of the shadows to put their lives and limbs on the line for what they believe in. All of the names may not be remembered for all of history. I consider them all on the list of heroes.
My hat is off to all who have made the sacrifices they did for what they believe in. It is selfless devotion to put down your life for another. Upe, you know where I stand with your daughter’s boyfriend. He is in my thoughts and prayers.
Maravilla – I have to say that Roark is right here, the U.S. is winning; there are only about 3,000 U.S. deaths and yet the Iraqi’s (the arch enemy who were about to launch a nuclear attack any minute from mobile rocket launchers – remember those imtellingence photos at the U.N war presentation By Collin Powell? – non of which were actually found by the way), have lost in excess of 500,000 people so the U.S must be winning? No…isn’t that how one keeps score in war?
Alfred you are really mistaken about the Challenger and you’re right that there are typically risks associated with these missions–this was not part of risks that they had calculated. It is such an example of the “Groupthink” mentality that it is actually used as an example to teach about this psychological phenomena. It was not part of the calculated risks, they had plenty of data & engineers stating that those O rings should not and would not work under 53 degree weather and yet they bashed them over the head & went over their heads to their superiors and finally the company in charge of the analysis said, well, we’ve given you the data, removed the advice not to launch and NASA chose to go forward. I’ve actually seen the interviews with the engineers, the superiors and the NASA personnel. It was NOT an inevitable event. It was an event that occurred because the people who had the knowledge and dared to question the “wisdom” of NASA were silenced for what was considered THE ULTIMATE GOAL (this may start sounding familiar to you now?). You have to remember that at that time the space program was being questioned and funding was not as ample as before, they thought that if they delayed this take off which was to be historical because it had the civilian teacher on board it would be “bad for business” and what transpired was a tragedy that could have been prevented and became the unfortunate historical link for Challenger….
Rebeca, I think I may have not been clear in what I said. The calculated risk was determined in the original planning stages of the program. They knew they would lose one. The decision to launch on that particular day was a bad one. I know they knew beforehand that it was too cold, and the O rings were not flexible enough to seal the boosters.
I just reread you post, just for further clarification. NASA’s space shuttle program, based on statistical analysis, was prepared for the loss of one vehicle.
The statistics were based on the complexity of the shuttle, the human error factor, and the fact we had lost Apollo Astronauts on the pad. It was an inherent risk factor.
I don’t like cold statistics, but it was part of the plan.The Challenger disaster was human error on a grand scale. Pressure was being applied, and somebody blinked. It was a totally preventable disaster.
One thing is for NASA to make a statistical analysis and conclude that they “may loose one spacecraft” due to unforeseen causes and another thing is to have the cause put square in front of your face and still choose to be blind to it because you think “it’s worth the risk.” Even though I’ve trekked thru amazing tropical jungles like Corcovado Nat’l Park, faced more than one viper in CR, counted croc and alligator populations in Caño Negro AT NIGHT, been up to my neck in the swamps of Palo Verde and thigh deep in its mud to the point that I thought it would swallow me whole among many other excursions that could be considered risky, my friends know that I probably will not be “bungee jumping” anytime soon unless it was to save someone’s life. No offense meant to bungee jumping and those that like the thrill of it. I consider it too risky for the thrill it may bring me so I don’t risk it. I too choose to take calculated risks and I assure you that I was well prepared throughout those adventures, accompanied by colleagues and not only had knowledge about what I could encounter as well as the expectation that I could encounter unforeseen situations along with good dose of respect for nature. Calculated risks are one thing, loosing your way and sending someone to their grave to save your organizational/ political/ personal pride is another…It’s not very far from the war scenario we’ve been discussing….people get stuck and stop using logic to come to their conclusions for the oddest of reasons…
I am in total agreement with you. What they did was NOT a calculated risk. They were playing with lives. And that is never worth the risk.
That’s the problem Alfred, ONE person did not blink (that’s what the human error was supposed to be), it was a whole bunch of them! That’s what they were NOT counting on and why they changed the leadership style at NASA to prevent this from happening again. That’s why people need to question because sometimes even the best of leaders get lost and can’t see the forest from the trees..Similar to what’s happened with Iraq except only the people of the US have moved, while many of the “leaders” continue the course to tragedy for the least noblest of reasons….
The question should be, what is it that we are winning. Is it just winning a war for winning’s sake, or does it serve a purpose?
Take a look at a map and see where Iraq is located. You will then understand why we have something like 11 bases there, and are building that huge embassy. 20 Years, or forever?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
