Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83 (MC840302); site mcvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!godot!harvard!seismo!mcvax!piet
From: piet@mcvax.UUCP (Piet Beertema)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Reagan's re-election
Message-ID: <6187@mcvax.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 20-Nov-84 06:52:55 EST
Article-I.D.: mcvax.6187
Posted: Tue Nov 20 06:52:55 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 22-Nov-84 05:55:23 EST
References: <6166@mcvax.UUCP> <3171@ucbvax.ARPA> <47@uwvax.UUCP> <106@talcott.UUCP> <679@erix.UUCP> <111@talcott.UUCP>
Reply-To: piet@mcvax.UUCP (Piet Beertema)
Distribution: net
Organization: CWI, Amsterdam
Lines: 14


	>You may ask at this point, "If the U.S. can hit the U.S.S.R from North
	>America, why do they have missiles in Europe?"  The answer is
	>detectability.  Cruise missiles are designed to get by the radar, and
	>they are not long range.
So your answer hides the reality: those missiles are placed here to give the
USA a possibility to fight out a "limited" (?) nuclear war far from their own
territory. That means: in Europe. And in the view of the US a "limited" nuclear
war will not lead to a global nuclear exchange. So: Europe gone, USSR severely
weakened, USA survives without major damage. That's US policy.....

-- 
	Piet Beertema, CWI, Amsterdam
	...{seismo,decvax,philabs}!mcvax!piet