Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site decwrl.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!harpo!decvax!decwrl!rhea!vaxuum!dyer From: dyer@vaxuum.DEC (Where's the falafel?) Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Answer to Freeze Question Revisited Message-ID: <6416@decwrl.UUCP> Date: Thu, 22-Mar-84 09:00:53 EST Article-I.D.: decwrl.6416 Posted: Thu Mar 22 09:00:53 1984 Date-Received: Fri, 23-Mar-84 20:43:25 EST Organization: DEC Engineering Network Lines: 42 \~/ ~News Flash from Jym Dyer!~ \~/ In a previous article, where I answered the Freeze Question, I pre- sented two different explanations about Reagan's motives for proposing the "Zero Option" arms limitation: .------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | I suppose one could argue that Reagan knew that the Soviets would | never agree to this proposal; thus the proposal was made with no intention | of being carried out. Another insight is offered with Reagan's revealing | that he wasn't aware until recently that the Soviets have most of their | nuclear forces on land! `------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Today I got mail from an alert reader who pointed out that the two arguments together don't make sense; i.e., if Reagan didn't know that the Soviets' nuclear forces were primarily land-based, how did he know that the Soviets would never agree to the proposal? A good question; I guess I should answer it. First, I was just *presenting* the first argument, not arguing it. The asker of the "Freeze Question" explicitly discouraged "a diatribe against a public figure"; since people tend to vary widely in what they consider a diatribe (depending, of course, on which public figure is involved), I didn't offer much criticism at all. I'm not convinced that Reagan *knew* the Soviets wouldn't accept his proposal. And I'm not convinced that he *didn't* know. I simply don't know, and nobody outside of the Reagan Administration knows for sure, either! Remember that I contrasted the argument against the fact that Reagan was not aware of the Soviets' lesser sea-based nuclear forces. I think a better understanding of what was going on with the Zero Option proposal can be acheived by reflecting on this fact. I don't think it matters much whether or not Reagan thought the So- viets would go for his proposal; whether they did or didn't, his proposal would "look good": if they did agree with it, Reagan could then say, "See? We can only deal with them by threatening to deploy more missiles;" if they didn't agree with it, Reagan could then say, "See? They don't want to nego- tiate in good faith. We can only deal with them by deploying more missiles." Either way, the basic philosophy of dealing with the arms race with more arms prevails. <_Jym_> | Jym Dyer | DEC | Nashua, NH | ...{allegra,decvax}!decwrl!rhea!vaxuum!dyer | Thu 22-Mar-1984 09:07 Zen (not EST!) Time