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 ).