Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site dolqci.UUCP Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!qantel!lll-crg!seismo!rlgvax!dolqci!mike From: mike@dolqci.UUCP (Mike Stalnaker) Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Reply to Tim Sevener re: US armed strength. Message-ID: <345@dolqci.UUCP> Date: Wed, 20-Nov-85 10:35:38 EST Article-I.D.: dolqci.345 Posted: Wed Nov 20 10:35:38 1985 Date-Received: Tue, 26-Nov-85 21:58:09 EST References: <756@whuxl.UUCP> <29200244@uiucdcs> <362@whuts.UUCP> Reply-To: mike@dolqci.UUCP (Mike Stalnaker) Organization: U.S. Dept of Labor, ETA/UI Quality Control Lines: 86 Let's clarify a few points: In article <828@whuxl.UUCP> orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) writes: > > >The U.S. spent more in 1980 than in 1970 in constant dollars for defense: >despite the fact we were fighting a substantial war in Vietnam in 1970. > OK, this may well be the case. Again: WE HAVE TO MAKE UP FOR THE ALMOST TOTAL STANDSTILL THAT EXISTED after Vietnam. Plus, I have never said that the milatary isn't guilty of large amounts of waste. >> >> Tim, when you say congress approved 95% of Reagan's requests, >> was that by number of requests, or $??? > > that is by $$$, i.e. Congress approved 95% of the dollar requests > for the budget presented by Reagan > This one still seems odd. Could you give me a pointer to a reliable source? (I don't want to sit down and analyze the whole DOD proposed budget vs the approved one...) > U.S. U.S.S.R. >strategic nuclear warheads 10,000+ 7400 >all nuclear warheads 29,100 17,140 > >The U.S. has 600,000 times the explosive power of Hiroshima. I think >a strong defense is quite different than mutual suicide. Sources? Also, look at total Launch Systems along with warheads. **NOTE** I am NOT advocating building more warheads per se. Updating delivery systems, improving ranges, etc, yes. More total warheads, we don't need. My biggest grouse has been that our delivery systems are not protected enough. (With the exception of the SLBM fleet) >Kruschev *never* said "we will bury you." What he said was >"we will survive you." This has an entirely different meaning. > If the translation was different, or misunderstood, ok. I don't speak more than 30 or 40 words of Russian, so I can only go by translations. >If the Soviet Union is so set upon "world conquest" why is it that >they haven't invaded the small Communist countries of >Rumania, Yugoslavia, and Albania for the past 40 years? >Rumania had 30,000 people in a demonstration against missile deployments >by both East and West. Why hasn't the Soviet Union nuked Rumania yet? >Since Rumania, Yugoslavia, and Albania are not members of NATO the >USSR would have no opposition to attack from NATO forces in these >countries. >Why did the Soviets agree to allow Austria to return to sovereignty >decades ago? > "Peace in the World, > or the World in Pieces!" > tim sevener whuxn!orb This is the part I have the real argument with. What about Hungary, Chezklosvokia(sp?), Berlin, Afghanastan, North Vietnam, Poland, and Laos just to name a few? All taken either with the direct involvement of Soviet troops, or Milatary assistance. To say that the Soviet Union is not attempting eventual world conquest is to deny the that Marx and Lenin ever existed. World conquest has been a part of the Soviet Conquest ever since the Revolution. Again I am not arguing for MORE warheads, or even for Nukes at all. What I am saying is that the S.U. has proven again and again that they will expand their empire any way they can, at almost any cost, and that they must not be allowed to do so. Please note that in my original article, I used the term strong DEFENSE. Unlike many, I try to seperate offense and defense. Also, one cannot simply deal with the balance of nuclear power, but must also look at the balance of conventional power as well. One parting thought: Have we shot down any unarmed airliners that have gotten off course over our territory? -- Mike Stalnaker uucp: {seimso,hao,decvax!decuac}!dolqci!mike arpa: mike%dolqci.uucp@seismo.css.gov "You can have peace, or you can have Freedom. Never count on having both at the same time." --Lazarus Long