Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site utai.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcsri!utai!yali
From: yali@utai.UUCP (Yawar Ali)
Newsgroups: can.general
Subject: Re: Star Wars
Message-ID: <423@utai.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 12-Apr-85 12:11:59 EST
Article-I.D.: utai.423
Posted: Fri Apr 12 12:11:59 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 12-Apr-85 12:25:23 EST
References: <909@ubc-vision.CDN> <389@mnetor.UUCP> <1003@utcsri.UUCP> <1014@utcsri.UUCP>
Organization: CSRI, University of Toronto
Lines: 40

In reference to SDI, Tom West writes:
>   Isn't much of this worry unfounded?  Is there any indication that the system
> is even going to work?  It seems kind of funny that I haven't heard of any
> laser physicists talk about the feasability on either side.  

>   In my opinion, the only point is what the money would have been spent on
> otherwise.

Yes, serious technical questions have been raised about the feasibility
of SDI. However, it is worth bearing in mind that in practice SDI
is likely to boil down to some sort of defense for a limited number
of military targets, such as missile silos, rather than the grand
umbrella described so grandiloquently by President Reagan in his
public announcement. The former scheme is likely to be more
technically feasible, especially if combined with a first-strike
policy, since if most of the other side's missiles could be
disabled in their silos the defensive system would not need
to be all that comprehensive anyway. It need not necessarily
be the case that the side deploying a defensive system actually
intends to combine it with a first-strike policy; the other side
will be forced to assume that it does, using the standard military
"worst case scenario" analysis.
Moreover, the true effectiveness of such a system will
always be uncertain, since it can't be tested under
realistic conditions. 
Thus, SDI need not be particularly effective in itself;
in the present political and military climate, the mere
threat of one side potentially gaining a unilateral
advantage over the other can prove extremely destabilizing
by fuelling a major arms race. For instance, see the
article by Bundy, Kennan, McNamara, and Smith in the
Winter 1984/85 issue of the journal Foreign Affairs
for some arguments along these lines.
By the way, SDI has also been criticized on technical
grounds, by laser physicists and others. See the
article by Hans Bethe et al. which appeared in 
I believe the October 1984 issue of Scientific American, for instance.

					Yawar Ali
				utzoo!bnr-vpa!bnr-di!yali