Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1exp 11/4/83; site ihuxf.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!seismo!harpo!floyd!vax135!ariel!houti!hogpc!drux3!ihnp4!ihuxf!larry
From: larry@ihuxf.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Re: Re: BTL Takes the Lead
Message-ID: <1637@ihuxf.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 17-Nov-83 13:04:38 EST
Article-I.D.: ihuxf.1637
Posted: Thu Nov 17 13:04:38 1983
Date-Received: Sat, 19-Nov-83 01:45:18 EST
References: <749@ihuxl.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, Il
Lines: 26

While it was true that TV shows can be a little more "black & white" (no pun
intended) than real life - I wasn't trying to say that the US is on the same
side as the angels.  I'm not even saying that the US should STOCK PILE the
overload of nuclear weapons that currently has.  What I was trying to point
out is that the US can *NOT* afford to lose what little TECHNILOGICAL
advantage we have.  Disarmiment talks seem to focus on the "most threatening"
weapons -- naturally those that are the newest.  (When was the last time the
peace talks met to agree on the number of arrows we have?)

Of course super technical weapons is not ALWAYS the answer either.  Our F-16
fighters may be the most advanced thing in the air - trouble is we have a hard
tie KEEPING them in the air.  Since they are so expensive there aren't that
many and when you account for those planes that our out of service, we end up
with very few that are actually flyable.  Maybe this suggests that we should
have less sophisticated/expensive "disposable" hardware.

There was a one of those "political humor" cartoons in the paper recently that
had the caption: "Guess which of these weapons has kill more people", three of
the pictures were typical weapons such as a nuclear bomb, MX missle, and the
likes.  The forth was a pickup type truck with TNT in it speeding towards a
building.  Not a very funny cartoon, but it certainly said something.
-- 


		Larry Marek
		 ihnp4!ihuxf!larry