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