Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!floyd!harpo!eagle!mhuxl!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!parsec!ctvax!uokvax!andree
From: andree@uokvax.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Unilateral disarmament? - (nf)
Message-ID: <4641@uiucdcs.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 19-Dec-83 22:52:09 EST
Article-I.D.: uiucdcs.4641
Posted: Mon Dec 19 22:52:09 1983
Date-Received: Wed, 21-Dec-83 05:28:35 EST
Lines: 21

#R:hp-kirk:12800007:uokvax:5000045:000:930
uokvax!andree    Dec 18 16:58:00 1983

What would the US do if the USSR unilaterally disarmed? I think that the
answer is `nothing.'

This is radically different from what I think would happen in the converse
situation. This difference is not due to any difference I percieve in the
people involved (the rulers of both countries), but in the manner that those
people remain in power.

In the USSR, the mass of the populace has nothing to say about who is going
to rule the country and their actions. In the US, the mass of the populace
has very little say - but they do have SOME say. If the ruling class of the
US tried a starting a nuclear war with a disarmed USSR, I think the people
of the US would promptly throw them out on their ear. I know I'd be shouting
for such things (as well as charges of murder, etc.). Witness the impeachment
movement after Grenada (short-lived, but it was there) as an example. I don't
think the USSR has this form of feedback.

	<mike