Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site alberta.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcsri!sask!alberta!ken
From: ken@alberta.UUCP (Ken Hruday)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Canadian participation in Star Wars.
Message-ID: <524@alberta.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 31-May-85 17:45:46 EDT
Article-I.D.: alberta.524
Posted: Fri May 31 17:45:46 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 1-Jun-85 03:37:40 EDT
References: <893@mnetor.UUCP>
Reply-To: ken@alberta.UUCP (Ken Hruday)
Organization: U. of Alberta, Edmonton, AB
Lines: 77

In article <893@mnetor.UUCP> fred@mnetor.UUCP writes:
>
>	Well, those that represent our interests have still not decided
>whether we are to participate in the U.S. "Star-Wars" defence
>research.

I recall watching a news program in which the Official Canadian "reaction"
to Star Wars was discussed. The consensus of the experts was that the
Mulroney Government had probably already made up their minds that they would 
participate, the percieved purpose of the study they initiated was that
it is a stalling tactic to allow the government to gauge public opinion
and to prepare the people for the inevitable.

>              ...   but because from what I've heard of it,
>it won't work.  It only defends against ICBM delivery, and it
>is not even 100% at that! 
>	It is very easy for the Soviets to say OK, we'll just deliver
>the bombs by a different method, (ie. planes, trucks,...), and
>the west can play with all their high tech toys all they like.
>It is even possible that nuclear devices be planted in strategic
>locations far in advance of hostilities for detination at the 
>convenient time, *without warning*. The cost is very low compared
>to the budget for Star Wars. This means that the whole effort is
>a waste of time from a stategic standpoint.

Actually, the consensus seems to be that the system can be easily
overwhelmed by increasing the number of ICBMs without resorting to
different delivery schemes. This would likely result in an escalation
in armaments since this "counter Star Wars stategy" is the simplest
and most cost effective of all. The Russians don't need to do anything 
different than what they're doing now - they just do more of it.
But additional delivery methods are an alternative, with a cruise
missle type of approach being the most likely - if and when they 
develop the appropriate technology.


>	About the only advantage I can see is the development of a
>capability to handle this kind of technology. The spin-offs
>might be rather neat. But it doesn't really justify the expence.

Some observers claim that this is the very reason that the Soviets
are worried about the Star Wars scheme - not so much that they expect
it to work but the possibly large technology gap that could be created.
It is difficult to say whether this type of program would "create" more
technology than a more directed program such as the Japanese 5th 
generation project.

>We could spend the money to much better advantage elsewhere, and
>that could include conventional military weapons as well as 
>more peaceful research. Things that are more likely to be used.
>	That's it folks...any comments?
>
>Cheers,		Fred Williams.

I agree that the money could be better spent elsewhere but it wasn't
clear to me whether Canada would be footing the bill or whether the
U.S. military would be contracting out to Canadian companies. Does
anyone have clarification on this? If the Canadian government was 
to sponser any involvement, my vote is also NO. Our money could be
spent more effectively on more peaceful research or on reducing the 
national debt.

It seems to me that the Star Wars scheme is another instance of throwing
money at a problem and hoping that it'll go away. Some problems have
no monetary solution and I'm afraid that world peace is one of them.
Constructing an "Ultimate Defense Shield" is, in some ways, easier than
solving the problem the old fashioned way - ie. compromise. I suspect
that the White House would rather acheive peace without conceding anything
to the Russians (the reverse also holds, although the Russians aren't
in a position to propose anything as ambitious as Star Wars).

I don't believe that Star Wars is a solution to global destruction, the
only sure way to prevent missle attack is to insure that there are no
missles to launch.

					Ken Hruday
				  University of Alberta