Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site fisher.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!princeton!astrovax!fisher!david
From: david@fisher.UUCP (David Rubin)
Newsgroups: net.followup,net.politics
Subject: Re: Star Wars Defense...
Message-ID: <291@fisher.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 24-Aug-84 16:50:07 EDT
Article-I.D.: fisher.291
Posted: Fri Aug 24 16:50:07 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 25-Aug-84 07:48:36 EDT
References: <302@ihu1e.UUCP>
Organization: Princeton Univ. Statistics
Lines: 37


>I've never heard anyone seriously denounce  unilateral  disarmament  and  give
>some real reasons why it won't work.  What would happen if the US shot all its
>nuclear weapons out into space or dropped them into  a  live  volcano  or  did
>something  to  make  them  inaccessible  to  us or anyone else?  We could even
>invite the Soviets to watch.  Then what would  they  do?   I  seriously  doubt
>they'd rub their hands together in glee and start pushing their buttons.  They
>don't want to conquer a waste land.  Meanwhile we could use most of the  money
>we'd  save  on  peaceful  programs  (like space exploration, medical research,
>etc.) and still have enough for a strong conventional defense.

No, the USSR wouldn't immediately launch a strike against the US. They
would just do as they damn well please. Who's going to stop them? 

What money are you going to have left over from defense if the Soviets
are free to demand that Western Europe trade with the USSR on the same
proprietary basis Eastern Europe does, to occupy and monopolize
petroleum producing centers in the Middle East, etc., etc.

Rational Soviet leaders are not interested in mutual destruction; that
is why deterrence has worked. However, the Soviet system does not
allow "nice" men to rise to positions of leadership; it selects
individuals for the desire for ability to wield power. It may be 
plausible to believe that they would not gratuitously incinerate the US,
but it is naive to believe they would voluntarily forgo the opportunity
for unmatched power.

There have been instances where unilateral disarmanent has been
employed, by intent or accident. Examples include Britain in the
1930's, Britain and France in the 1950's, and the US in the 1970's. In
none of these cases did the opponent (Nazi Germany in the first, the
USSR in the latter two) even slow down its buildup. Historical
precedent, as well as rational expectation, argues against unilateral
disarmanent.

					David Rubin
			{allegra|astrovax|princeton}!fisher!david