Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site tty3b.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!floyd!clyde!ihnp4!we13!tty3b!mjk
From: mjk@tty3b.UUCP (Mike Kelly)
Newsgroups: net.politics,net.tv.da
Subject: re: Re: How to Decrease the Chances of Total Destruction
Message-ID: <257@tty3b.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 6-Dec-83 10:29:10 EST
Article-I.D.: tty3b.257
Posted: Tue Dec  6 10:29:10 1983
Date-Received: Fri, 9-Dec-83 01:48:43 EST
References: <355@ucbtopaz.CC.Berkeley.ARPA>
Organization: Teletype Corp., Skokie, Ill
Lines: 25

Sam Hall accuses me of McCarthyite tactics in labeling responses
from military researchers "rationalizations" (since it tends to
denounce anything they say in advance).  I didn't mean to dis-
courage military researchers from contributing.  Several friends
of mine from school are now working at Lawrence Livermore Labs in
California (one of the major nuclear weapons R&D sites), and most
of their responses to me are simple rationalizations: "wouldn't
you rather have me doing this than some real nut?"  "If I don't
do it, someone else will.", etc.

I guess I've just come to expect this from military researchers.
I don't doubt that some truly believe in what they're doing.  But
I also know many do not, and it puzzles  me that they continue 
in this kind of work when there are so many jobs available in CS
and EE that are not directly military-related.  

I know that 'everything is military related'; that's what happens
when you run a war economy, as we do in the U.S.  But there's an
important message in explicitly refusing to work directly for the
military and stating WHY you are refusing the job.  Furthermore,
that's not unilateral disarmament.  It's taking direct action to
help slow down the arms race.

Mike Kelly
..!ihnp4!tty3b!mjk