Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 8/7/84; site ucbvax.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!ihnp4!ucbvax!medin
From: medin@ucbvax.ARPA (Milo Medin)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Re: Strategic Arms (reply to Tim Sevener) and Apologia
Message-ID: <2118@ucbvax.ARPA>
Date: Sat, 22-Sep-84 17:33:43 EDT
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.2118
Posted: Sat Sep 22 17:33:43 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 26-Sep-84 13:17:14 EDT
References: <204@tekigm.UUCP>, <1822@ucbvax.ARPA> <493@tty3b.UUCP>
Organization: University of California at Berkeley
Lines: 45

"...We could have stopped mirv's then, with a treaty..."

Oh come on now, just because we didnt choose to pursue that course
doesnt mean it would have worked.  Even if the Soviet's would
have signed a treaty banning mirv's, I'd like to point out one
very important point:  How do you verify that a missile isnt mirv'ed?
This was apparently an important consideration to the administration
in making its decision to go wih mirv'ing.  Some people can talk
in vague generalities that you can use satillites or some such
box to tell us this.  Dream on.  A good treaty (if one exists)
must be verifiable.  If its not, what good is it?  Its just like
that genocide agreement the US has signed.  Big deal.  There
are many countries that have signed it that have committed acts
that would be considered genocide under the treaty.  So what has
happened to them?  You want us to nuke them or something?  That's
why that treaty, while looking good on the surface, was worthless.
Big deal.  How can you enforce a treaty anyways?  Especially one
with the Soviets?  Do you go to war over some violation of SALT
like crypting your missile telemetry?  You say, well the treaty
covers violations...  Yeah, you go to the SCC and say, 'Hey, you
guys have broken article 6 subpart c item r of X treaty.'  The
Russians say, so what?  SO then you go to the press and say, 'Hey!
the Russians have violated article 6 subpart c item r of treaty
X!'  And nobody cares.  You might go to the UN with it, and then
they'll say, you still have enough, go away.  So then what do
you do?  You eat the violation is what you do.  Ok, then you
say, well if they do it, we can do it too!  And you tell the
Air Force to go crypt your data.  The Soviets scream bloody
murder, the press jumps on your case, the Congress kills funds
for the missile, and you get a rep. as a warmonger as well
as getting all the 3rd world countries calling you a welcher
and how you dont believe in arms control.  You really think
I am exaggerating?  This is why I dont favor any sort of treaty
with the russians being counted on to do diddly squat.  Everybody
talks about negotiations and some talk about verification.
But nalmost nobody talks about compliance.  How do you make
the Russians live up to their word?  The bottom line is you
cant, and it all boils down to trust in the basic honor
of the country.  That isnt what I want to base my family's
security on...

				Milo Medin
				...!ucbvax!medin
				medin@ucbarpa