Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ucbvax.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!ucbvax!medin
From: medin@ucbvax.ARPA (Milo Medin)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: poll  (nuclear disarmament verifiability)
Message-ID: <5544@ucbvax.ARPA>
Date: Sat, 16-Mar-85 19:00:20 EST
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.5544
Posted: Sat Mar 16 19:00:20 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 17-Mar-85 02:45:29 EST
References: <5202@ucbvax.ARPA> <386@abnji.UUCP>
Organization: University of California at Berkeley
Lines: 49

> If you build it there, how?  You'd need some sort of factory.  To build it
> in that factory, you'd need resources delivered.  They can be seen.  To
> build the factory, you'd also need resources.  They, too, can be seen.
> 
> Say you delivery your GLCM via a tunnel... well, that's alot of earth moving,
> where are you going to put it?
> 
> If it is your normal basement, then the warhead's radiation can be observed.
> If you harden your basement, well, that's a bit suspicious.
> 
> Ever heard of spies?
> 
> You put a GLCM in your basement, and someone will know about it.  Shortly
> after that, those that need to know will know.
> -- 
> James C Armstrong, Jnr.  { ihnp4 || allegra || mcnc || cbosgb } !abnji!jca
> 
> "Emotion is a weakness!"
> "I don't think so"
> "It brought you back for your friend and it will cost you your life!"


Tracking what goes in is easier said than done.  Maybe you could watch
my basement all the time, but not everybody's.

As for the argument of tracking its radiation, well a modicum of shielding 
will fix that, I don't need to harden my basement.  

And as for looking for it by looking for a factory, well, factories
arent the only way to produce things.  Remember the Iraqi reactor
facility the Israeli's took out a couple years ago?  They had
a plant to manufacture weapons underneath the main plant.  Now,
with a little work, I could make bombs underneath nuclear reactors
very surreptitiously.  Its a losing fight, there are too many
ways of getting around it.

An even if we suspected them of it, what would we do, yell at them
at the SCC?  Big deal.  

I remember some arms control proponent talking about cruise missiles
they other day.  He was saying that if we don't sign a treaty
banning cruise missiles now, we never could because they aren't
erifiable.  How's that for logic?

I agree with Ed Hall, the era of verifiable treaties is over,
what we need now is stability. 


					Milo