Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site watrose.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!watrose!lffast
From: lffast@watrose.UUCP (lffast)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Peace at any price
Message-ID: <7178@watrose.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 28-Dec-84 12:37:31 EST
Article-I.D.: watrose.7178
Posted: Fri Dec 28 12:37:31 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 29-Dec-84 02:42:49 EST
References: <767@ubc-vision.CDN>
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 20

> The problem with the present level of nuclear armament is the price of a war
> fought with these weapons.  The price of that war could well be the
> destruction of all life on earth.  It is THAT price that I am unwilling to
> pay.  The price of peace based on disarmament is a pittance in comparison.
> 				Marc Majka

Disarmament, as I understand it, would be meaningless unless the eventual goal
is that we eventually have few enough arms around that the world would not be
decimated (sp?).  At the moment war is unthinkable, everybody loses.  If total
destruction is not inevitable, war becomes conceivable again and therefore,
by my rationalizations, more likely.

I think you're ignoring this price of peace based on disarmament, and that is
an increased likelyhood of war.

At the moment, I think the highest risk is that of war by accident.   I think
disarmament is trading off cost against likelyhood.

	Larry Fast ( University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario )
The opinions expressed here are MINE ( but I'd never admit it ).