Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!utcsri!utegc!utai!ubc-vision!van-bc!sl From: sl@van-bc.UUCP Newsgroups: can.politics Subject: Re: Make the rich pay? - no, the middle class, as usual. Message-ID: <177@van-bc.UUCP> Date: Fri, 19-Dec-86 02:36:21 EST Article-I.D.: van-bc.177 Posted: Fri Dec 19 02:36:21 1986 Date-Received: Fri, 19-Dec-86 22:35:35 EST References: <2819@watdcsu.UUCP> <708@looking.UUCP> <3764@utcsri.UUCP> <2564@hcrvx2.UUCP> <329@ubc-vision.UUCP> Reply-To: sl@van-bc.UUCP (Stuart Lynne) Distribution: can Organization: Public Access Unix, Vancouver, BC. Lines: 38 In article <329@ubc-vision.UUCP> majka@ubc-vision.UUCP (Marc Majka) writes: >In article <2564@hcrvx2.UUCP> jimr@hcr.UUCP (Jim Robinson) writes: >>Here's my two cents worth: [...] > >> ... is there anyone out there who can explain why it is to >>our advantage to let the other side have the ability to nuke us into >>oblivion secure in the knowledge that we cannot retaliate? > >Because maybe then they might not be terrified of us nuking them into >oblivion first. The effect might be so calming that they might decide to >spend the mega-billions that *they* spend on arms instead on useful programs >for their people. We, of course, would have beat them to it, spending our >excess mega-billions on good things like railways, so that the above - >mentioned Maritimers could travel to Toronto in more comfort. The effect might even be so calming that they decide just to use their non nuclear army. The reason the Western world spends mega-billions on nuclear arms is twofold. First we would have to spend MORE mega-billions to adequately man and equip a standing army of the same effectivness as the Eastern bloc. Second, there is a distinct lack of interest in the Western society to have LARGE standing armies at the ready. The nuclear defense is less expensive. And requires smaller armies on our side. The bottom line on this, as with most subjects is simple economics, whats cheaper. Of course if we put all the bases in the Maritimes we wouldn't have to ship the people east or pay them welfare or uic :). Personally I don't agree with the idea of a nuclear defense, but I would probably be more nervous if we didn't have it. It's quite possible that it has prevented a third world war. -- Stuart Lynne Public Access Network - Vancouver BC UUCP: ihnp4!alberta!ubc-vi!van-bc!sl Mail: 225B Evergreen Dr., Port Moody, BC, Canada, V3H 1S1 Phone: 604-937-7532