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!dec-rhea!dec-elmer!goun
From: goun@elmer.DEC (Roger H. Goun)
Newsgroups: net.space
Subject: Re: High Frontier
Message-ID: <1459@decwrl.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 13-Jun-84 16:41:26 EDT
Article-I.D.: decwrl.1459
Posted: Wed Jun 13 16:41:26 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 21-Jun-84 02:50:39 EDT
Organization: DEC Engineering Network
Lines: 30

	Why are those people opposed to High Frontier so adamantly against
	any form of space defense?....How does it feel to live in a country
	that, with six months' notice, still couldn't shoot down an incoming
	warhead?

I personally am opposed to a space defense because I feel that such a system 
will only increase the number of warheads in the world.  My premise is that
it is impossible (with current technology) to build a perfect defense.  

If we can build a defense against (say) 50% of incoming warheads, or (say)
75% of missiles in their boost phase, then I'm certain that the Soviets will
simply build enough new missiles that they can feel assured of delivering
the same megatonnage to the same targets as they can now, despite the
defense we're erected.  If we improve our defense, but it is still not
"perfect," they will simply build still more missiles.  More missiles in the
world make the world less stable, for reasons which should be obvious.

I'm donning my asbestos suit.  Flame away.

(The preceding is the opinion of the author and should not be construed as
the opinion of his friends, employer, or anyone else.)

					-- Roger Goun

ARPA:    goun%elmer.DEC@decwrl.ARPA
UUCP:    {allegra, decvax, ucbvax}!decwrl!rhea!elmer!goun
USPS:    Digital Equipment Corp., HLO2-2/H13
         77 Reed Road; Hudson, MA 01749
MCIMail: RGoun
Tel:     (617) 568-6311