Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ucbvax.ARPA Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!medin From: medin@ucbvax.ARPA (Milo Medin) Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Re: Star Wars -> Nuclear war Message-ID: <5201@ucbvax.ARPA> Date: Sun, 3-Mar-85 21:51:52 EST Article-I.D.: ucbvax.5201 Posted: Sun Mar 3 21:51:52 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 4-Mar-85 20:49:52 EST References: <827@ames.UUCP> Distribution: net Organization: University of California at Berkeley Lines: 34 You are not being fair. Blainey's chief argument in 'cause of war' is that war originates out of ambiguity in power distribution. That is, if one side percieves itself to be clearly inferior to another, they will not attack. They may try and become stronger, but as long as who's on top remains clear, peace will continue, on the terms of the stronger. Let me say this, many of us who have worked on defensive systems (as I have) don't believe that a global shield can be built now, or in the near term. What we do believe is that significant increases in deterrence are achieveable. If you feel that the land based ICBM forces are vulnerable (as I do) and that they are needed (as I do), then they must be protected. Protection can be had with active or passive means. Nobody complains about building hard silos, but when building interceptors to stop RV's targeted at those same silos, we are somehow encouraging WW III. Many of the people who argue against BMD are people who buy MAD. If you negate MAD, thats a bad thing in their viewpoint. Well, MAD is obselete, we target counterforce, and have for a long time. I see nothing desirable in the deaths of millions of innocent people in case of a war. If the scale of nuclear war can be limited, then thats good. I don't advocate it being fought in the first place, but if it has to be, lets be prepared. And that preparation will further serve as a deterrent to the war. I don't buy MAD, if I did, I'd feel differently about BMD. So if we are going to discuss BMD, lets not fight the old counterforce-countervalue argument yet again... Milo