Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site watcgl.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!watnot!watcgl!jchapman From: jchapman@watcgl.UUCP (john chapman) Newsgroups: can.politics Subject: re: disarmament, peace movements, non-nuclear defense Message-ID: <2087@watcgl.UUCP> Date: Mon, 24-Jun-85 10:14:24 EDT Article-I.D.: watcgl.2087 Posted: Mon Jun 24 10:14:24 1985 Date-Received: Tue, 25-Jun-85 02:45:36 EDT Distribution: can Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario Lines: 154 <> What would a reasonable probability of nuclear war be? If we include <> war precipitated by accidental detonation/launch or phantom attacks <> being percieved by "defense" installations as well as actual planned <> attacks then perhaps a probability greater than 0.0000000....0000000001 <> would be resonable. How about the consequences? Since we are talking <> about what would very likely be the complete anihilation of all life <> on earth I think a value of infinity would be appropriate.> As witness the lack of popular revolt against the current situation (the <> > anti-nuclear marchers are numerically insignificant against the population <> > of the nations involved), most people are willing to take a (perceived) <> <> What do you consider insignificant? Polls indicate more than half of <> the canadian public does not want cruise testing in canada. Anywhere <> from 50,000 to 80,000 people (depending on whose estimates you want <> to believe) were in the last vancouver peace march ( I know that this <> is insignificant compared to the US/USSR populations but it is large <> for Canada and we do participate in the nuclear arms race in one <> way or another). < <50,000-80,000 *is* insignificant in a population of 25,000,000, dammit! Are you really that confident that Ron would rather give in to the <> soviets than commit global holocaust. Are you also sure that a war <> will not be started by mechanical/electronic/human-judgement error? < > As for the temporary nature of Soviet domination, when "temporary" is <> > defined as centuries, it's permanent as far as most folks are concerned. <> > -- <> Well as far as I personally/physically am concerned it is permanent <> too. However from a racial perspective it is but the bat of an eye <> whereas nuclear war is the end. Making decisions and promoting <> behaviour whose beneficial consequences will not be experienced for <> extremely long periods is, I hope, not completely foreign to the <> human race. < to hold down a population for very long. Not when the whole population is <> completely against the idea. < ... many of the smaller nations are now deciding that <> they should bring whatever pressure they can to bear on the US/USSR. <