Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!floyd!clyde!burl!hou3c!hocda!houxm!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!renner
From: renner@uiucdcs.UUCP (renner )
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Attitude about war - (nf)
Message-ID: <5045@uiucdcs.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 21-Jan-84 22:27:33 EST
Article-I.D.: uiucdcs.5045
Posted: Sat Jan 21 22:27:33 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 23-Jan-84 04:44:30 EST
Lines: 30

#R:aluxe:-128000:uiucdcs:29200059:000:1419
uiucdcs!renner    Jan 21 05:00:00 1984

>  Can you give me some examples of where the Soviets have violated Salt 1?
 
The United States has charged the Soviet Union with seven "violations
or possible violations" of SALT II and the 1972 ABM treaty.  These
include charges that the Soviet Union has tested two ICBMs (SALT II
allows for only one), that they encrypt more missile test telemetry
data than is allowed, and that a new radar station in Krasnoyarsk (in
Siberia) could be part of an ABM system (generally prohibited by the
ABM treaty).  The Soviet Union says that the radar station is intended
to track space vehicles. [Chicago Tribune, January 20, page 8.]

>  "Space Shuddle"? is that a dance?  What do you think would be the
>  reaction here if they built a shuttle that was funded primarily by
>  their military? And booked solid by the same?  I bet it would be 
>  pretty hairy.

There is some (inconclusive) evidence that the Soviet Union is building
a small shuttle.  It would presumably be booked solid by their
military.  Our Space Shuttle certainly is not.  There are 10 planned
missions for 1984, of which only two are booked by the Defense
Department (Challenger, July 14 and Sept.28).  [Source is ultimately
AW&ST, it's posted in net.space.] As to the funding of the Space
Shuttle, I was always under the impression that it was paid for by NASA
(could be wrong here, so mail me if you *know*).

Scott Renner
{ihnp4,pur-ee}!uiucdcs!renner