Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 alpha 4/15/85; site pucc-i
Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!pucc-j!pucc-i!afb
From: afb@pucc-i (Michael Lewis)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Adverse effects of the Abolition of Nuclear Weapons...
Message-ID: <1259@pucc-i>
Date: Mon, 27-Jan-86 12:00:27 EST
Article-I.D.: pucc-i.1259
Posted: Mon Jan 27 12:00:27 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 6-Feb-86 10:29:30 EST
References: <1245@pucc-i> <915@whuxl.UUCP>
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center
Lines: 51
Summary: Don't numbers count with regard to tanks, aircraft, artillery, also?

In article <915@whuxl.UUCP>, orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) writes:
> We often hear that the Soviets greatly outnumber American forces in Europe.
> This is true but ....

     Tim, you never miss a chance to foam at the mouth with anti-Reagan 
rhetoric.  This time I'm afraid you're pulling some figures out of nowhere...
I'm very interested to see your figures.  Even if your manpower figures are
correct (I've seen different ones), what about the 4:1 advantage in tanks and
combat aircraft?  What about the huge Warsaw Pact advantage in artillery? 

> Remember that simply *one* member of NATO (admittedly now split
> in two but the fidelity of East Germany to the Warsaw Pact is questionable)
> namely a united Germany, sliced through Russia like a hot knife through
> butter, while also maintaining a front against England... 

     What do the exploits of a united Germany 40 years ago have to do with the
capabilities of largely demilitarized (by WW 2 standards) West Germany?  West
Germany is largely demilitarized for one reason: the Soviets wouldn't have it
any other way.

> Now that nuclear weapons have become generally unpopular so that
> mythical "bomber gaps" "missile gaps" and the like become less
> successful in stirring support for the Pentagon and arms-makers,
> the "conventional weapons gap" will now become the new rallying
> cry for the military industrial complex.  Why even the "liberal"
> Democrats agree with that!.....
>            tim sevener   whuxn!orb

     "Military Industrial Complex" is to knee-jerk liberals as "Secular 
Humanism" is to idiots in Falwell's group. I love general-purpose catch phrases!
Here is proof that even a so-called undeluded pragmatist such as yourself
can ignore unpleasant realities for the sake of some good old-fashioned 
rhetoric....I am REAL interested in seeing some of your figures, especially 
those about tanks, aircraft, artillery, and chemical weapons.

     Speaking of chemical weapons...does anyone out there know that Soviet 
doctrine calls for liberal use of nerve-gas and other nasty substances?  That
US forces are the only ones in NATO able to respond in kind?  You may be 
correct, Tim, in saying that *total* NATO vs. Warsaw Pact forces are "roughly"
equal, but what if only those forces readily available (say, within 48 hrs.) 
are counted?  Soviet plans for the invasion of Europe (which are revised 
very frequently to be as up-to-date as possible) call for them to reach the
Channel in *seven* days!  What good are NATO's reserves then?

     By the way, how much more good are the forces of Belgium and the
Netherlands going to do for NATO than the forces of East Germany for the
Warsaw Pact? Do your manpower figures count the forces of Greece, Turkey, and
Italy, all of which are unlikely to be in the thick of a Central European 
action?

     Michael Lewis @ Purdue University