Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site fisher.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!princeton!astrovax!fisher!david
From: david@fisher.UUCP (David Rubin)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Strategic Arms (reply to Tim
Message-ID: <320@fisher.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 25-Sep-84 08:44:14 EDT
Article-I.D.: fisher.320
Posted: Tue Sep 25 08:44:14 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 26-Sep-84 19:46:14 EDT
References: <238@whuxl.UUCP> <2000034@iuvax.UUCP> <315@fisher.UUCP> <2119@ucbvax.ARPA>
Organization: Princeton Univ. Statistics
Lines: 9

Sure, I said the MX is a first strike weapon. But rather than going to
BMD, which will spark an incredibly expensive weapons race on both
sides without giving anyone more security, it would be better (and
cheaper) to place greater emphasis on existing systems not so
vulnerable (SLBM's and CM's) and to spend our money on new systems
which, unlike the MX, will not be vulnerable to first strike (e.g.
"Midgetman").

					David Rubin