Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site oliveb.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!decwrl!sun!qubix!ios!oliveb!jerry
From: jerry@oliveb.UUCP (Jerry Aguirre)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: The Chronic War-Preparers
Message-ID: <208@oliveb.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 30-Oct-84 17:37:05 EST
Article-I.D.: oliveb.208
Posted: Tue Oct 30 17:37:05 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 2-Nov-84 04:11:03 EST
References: <362@tjalk.UUCP> <2752@ucbcad.UUCP> <300@whuxl.UUCP>
Organization: Olivetti ATC, Cupertino, Ca
Lines: 26

I hear a lot of people proposing that large stockpiles of nuclear
weapons are increasing the chances of a war.  How can you justify this
belief given the fact that most of the wars occured before the invention
of nuclear weapons.  This includes two "World Wars".

Granted the effects of a nuclear war would be longer lived. I am not
convinced that more people would be killed.  A conventional WW3 could
easily kill as many people as a nuclear one.  It would just take
longer.

Granted that the nuclear missiles make escelation faster. I am not
convinced that they make it more probable.  Just read descriptions
of the events leading up to any war.  There was always plenty of time to
consider events and take action to prevent war.  The wars happened any
way.  Wars happen and will continue to happen when people convince
themselves that it is to their advantage to go to war.

Another idea being discussed receintly is that the Russians are "just
nice people" and don't want war.  We "nice Americans" broke our treaties
with the American Indians, napalmed civilians, and are the only nation
in the world to ever actually use nuclear weapons against people.  If we
can overcome our "niceness" so can they.  It just isn't a valid argument
concerning war.

					    Jerry Aguirre
{hplabs|fortune|idi|ihnp4|ios|tolerant|allegra|tymix}!oliveb!jerry