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