Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site whuts.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!whuxl!whuts!orb
From: orb@whuts.UUCP (SEVENER)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Adverse effects of the Abolition of Nuclear Weapons...
Message-ID: <519@whuts.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 28-Jan-86 17:54:24 EST
Article-I.D.: whuts.519
Posted: Tue Jan 28 17:54:24 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 6-Feb-86 10:33:16 EST
References: <1245@pucc-i> <915@whuxl.UUCP> <1259@pucc-i>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 21

From Michael Lewis:
> 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?
> 

1) please cite your reference for this amazing fact.  I do not
   find it at all credible
 
2) even *if* the Soviets "plans for the invasion of Europe"
   called for them to reach the Channel in seven days (a claim
   which I find on a par with Reagan's quotation of the John
   Birch Society on Lenin's statements about Central America) -
   what of it?
   The plans of both sides in World War I called for the whole war
   to be over in a *week* or so as well. It didn't turn out that
   way did it?  Unfortunately with nuclear weapons on both sides
   in Europe any European invasion could well end in a matter of
   *hours*.  Is this your preferred scenario for European conflict?
 
     tim sevener   whuxn!orb