Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site tty3b.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!mgnetp!ltuxa!tty3b!mjk
From: mjk@tty3b.UUCP (Mike Kelly)
Newsgroups: net.flame,net.politics
Subject: Re: RE: Reagan's joke
Message-ID: <479@tty3b.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 4-Sep-84 15:09:40 EDT
Article-I.D.: tty3b.479
Posted: Tue Sep  4 15:09:40 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 6-Sep-84 03:31:30 EDT
References: <1717@sdccs6.UUCP>
Organization: Teletype Corp., Skokie, Ill
Lines: 32

From: ix241@sdccs6.UUCP (John Testa):
    It is sad to have an arm race.  But the US and Europe have been
    walking while the USSR has been racing.  US: 3 new missiles in the last
    ten years.  USSR: 6(?) in the last ten years.  Be realistic when you
    get angry about policies and such you disagree with.

The real point, of course, is not how many new missiles each side added in the
last ten years but the total balance.  There is substantial evidence that the
total balance is roughly equal.  Counts comparing Soviet Bloc strength to U.S.
strength in Europe are calculated to deceive; what of the French force frappe
and the British nukes?  Include these and the so-called Soviet advantage melts.
As to conventional strength, it is far from clear that there is a Soviet advantage.
For example, the Soviets have more tanks, but NATO has more anti-tank weapons.
And the Soviet tanks weren't exactly marvels of stength when used in the Middle
East.   The Israelis were able to basically destroy every one they hit with U.S.-
made anti-tank weapons.

The question never answered by the amateur strategists is why in heaven the
Soviets would ever WANT to invade Western Europe.  They can barely keep Poland
under control, and the East Germans are starting to make frightening gestures
towards reunification.  One could argue that the quickest way to destroy the
Soviet Bloc is for them to invade Western Europe.  It seems to me that Soviet
defense policy is best understood as (a) building a protective wall around the
Soviet Union, which their current satellites are sufficient for provided the U.S.
doesn't make any threatening moves and (b) exploiting advantage where it appears
in Africa and the Mideast.  It is far from evident to me that Soviet policy is
directed at an invasion of Western Europe; far more likely is that it is directed
at the fear of an invasion FROM Western Europe.  Note that I'm not defending
Soviet policy, just trying to understand it.   To me, satellites in East Europe
are obnoxious.  So are satellites in Central America.

Mike Kelly