Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 8/23/84; site ucbcad.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!ucbvax!ucbcad!faustus From: faustus@ucbcad.UUCP Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Re: Politics, morals and nukes Message-ID: <2724@ucbcad.UUCP> Date: Sat, 6-Oct-84 13:29:17 EDT Article-I.D.: ucbcad.2724 Posted: Sat Oct 6 13:29:17 1984 Date-Received: Sun, 7-Oct-84 21:58:42 EDT References: <394@wucs.UUCP> Distribution: net Organization: UC Berkeley CAD Group, Berkeley, CA Lines: 19 > >> The argument over Star Wars has nothing to do with morality. > > GAK!! I don't believe I'm actually reading this in a major newspaper! If > the potential destruction of civilization is not a moral issue, what on earth > is??!! If (contrary to fact) a Star Wars defense could guarantee that no > cities or civilizations would die in nuclear war, we MOST CERTAINLY *WOULD* > have an obligation to pursue it! See, your "(contrary to fact)" is the whole argument. Many experts believe that the Star Wars defense plans would be unstabilizing, and some believe the opposite. Are you saying that the way to figure out who is right is to look deeply into our souls and see what our conscience tells us about relative values of different technologies? The only thing that IS a moral issue is something that is pretty obvious -- nuclear war is bad. So after you provide the experts with this information, please let them decide how best to avoid it without your interference. (Unless, of course, you are prepared to discuss the matter on a technical level.) Wayne