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