Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/3/84; site teddy.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!genrad!panda!teddy!lkk
From: lkk@teddy.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.space,net.politics
Subject: Re: Aviation Week on Star Wars
Message-ID: <1857@teddy.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 28-Dec-85 13:26:34 EST
Article-I.D.: teddy.1857
Posted: Sat Dec 28 13:26:34 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 29-Dec-85 05:30:35 EST
References: <1289@ames.UUCP> <772@petrus.UUCP> <1149@lll-crg.ARpA>
Reply-To: lkk@teddy.UUCP (Larry K. Kolodney)
Distribution: net
Organization: GenRad, Inc., Concord, Mass.
Lines: 35
Xref: linus net.space:3525 net.politics:12058
Summary: 

In article <1149@lll-crg.ARpA> medin@lll-crg.ARpA (Milo Medin) writes:
>First off, if you speak with people who work in the SDIO, they
>make no claims other than that this system is being built to
>protect our military assets primarily, and damage limitation
>to the population on a secondary basis.  The hype that some people
>(not the SDIO) are using to sell the system as a total inpenetrable
>defense is misleading.  

That "hype" is being spread by none other than the President of the
United States, Mr. R. Reagan.  He has stated on a number of occaisons his
vision of SDI eliminating the need for strategic nuclear weapons.  It 
was this view of Reagan's which was the reason for SDI being started in the
first place, and it is this vision which fuels political support for it.

Sounds to me the the various scientifically minded people who do have a
vested interested in the continuance of SDI have invented a new purpose for
it so that they can defend it to the scientific community, even though
THAT purpose is indefensable strategically or politically.




>				medin@ames.ARPA
				      ^^^^

Not surprising.



-- 
Sport Death,       (USENET) ...{decvax | ihnp4!mit-eddie}!genrad!panda!lkk
Larry Kolodney     (INTERNET) lkk@mit-mc.arpa
--------
Life is either a daring adventure, or nothing.
- Helen Keller