Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site dciem.UUCP
Path: utzoo!dciem!mmt
From: mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: A Missile Epistle - (nf)
Message-ID: <496@dciem.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 21-Nov-83 12:07:18 EST
Article-I.D.: dciem.496
Posted: Mon Nov 21 12:07:18 1983
Date-Received: Mon, 21-Nov-83 12:21:01 EST
References: <799@ucbcad.UUCP>
Organization: D.C.I.E.M., Toronto, Canada
Lines: 16

Given that a strategic nuclear force of some kind is necessary
for the foreseeable future, Michael Turner's idea of basing the
missiles in densely populated areas is the most sensible
suggestion in a long time. All the reasons he states are valid.

I doubt very much it would be possible politically, though. These
things have "radiation", and must therefore be kept away from people.
Perhaps they aren't as bad as nuclear power stations, though :-).
Interesting point: would people object more to a missile silo or
to a nuclear power station within 2 miles?

Martin Taylor
-- 

Martin Taylor
{allegra,linus,ihnp4,uw-beaver,floyd,ubc-vision}!utcsrgv!dciem!mmt