Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: Notesfiles $Revision: 1.6.2.17 $; site uiucdcs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!renner
From: renner@uiucdcs.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: The real issue about nuclear weapons
Message-ID: <29200165@uiucdcs.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 26-Nov-84 04:03:00 EST
Article-I.D.: uiucdcs.29200165
Posted: Mon Nov 26 04:03:00 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 27-Nov-84 04:03:03 EST
Lines: 40
Nf-ID: #N:uiucdcs:29200165:000:1697
Nf-From: uiucdcs!renner    Nov 26 03:03:00 1984

>  I happen to think that Doctors and biologists are far more qualified to
>  judge the health effects of Nuclear War than people who know how much
>  bang you can get with given weapons but know nothing about biology.
>  Let's listen to the experts-let's stop the arms race NOW!
>  				-- Tim Sevener (orb@whuxl)

Tim's argument is as follows:
    1.  Doctors and biologists are the best judge of the health effects 
	of nuclear war.
    2.  Doctors and biologists agree that a nuclear war would have
	disasterous effects on health care.
Therefore:
    3.  A nuclear war should be avoided.

    4.  Stopping the arms race NOW (ie., the nuclear "Freeze") is the 
	best way to avoid a nuclear war.
Therefore:
    5.  Let's stop the arms race NOW!

This is sloppy thinking at best, deliberate propagandizing at worst.  All
of us agree on point #3.  Many of us disagree with Tim on point #4.  The
real issue is not, "should we have a nuclear war," but rather, "what is the
best way to avoid nuclear war?"

I'd like to talk about this, but it's really hard to generate
discussion about a point that some people accept with an
almost-religious intensity.  Articles like the one I quoted only direct
the discussion away from the issue.  Articles with factual errors
("cruise missiles are first-strike weapons") and irrelevancies ("the US
has 30,000 warheads, the Soviet Union only 25,000") also get in the
way.  It's a losing battle trying to correct these -- by the time you
point out the errors in one article, the author has usually written 3
more with *new* mistakes.

We all agree that nuclear war is a bad thing.  Now let's talk about the
real issue.  

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