Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site whuxl.UUCP Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!whuxl!orb From: orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Reagan and the arms race: re to Albrecht Message-ID: <1022@whuxl.UUCP> Date: Thu, 6-Mar-86 14:50:44 EST Article-I.D.: whuxl.1022 Posted: Thu Mar 6 14:50:44 1986 Date-Received: Sat, 8-Mar-86 15:24:34 EST References: <155@jc3b21.UUCP> <1405@mhuxt.UUCP> <560@whuts.UUCP> <1410@mhuxt.UUCP> <5044@alice.uUCp> <2384@burdvax.UUCP> Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Whippany Lines: 58 I wrote: > > ... Reagan is the first President in > > 20 years to achieve absolutely NO arms control agreements. > > During his 5 years the Soviets have deployed hundreds of > > new nuclear weapons - are we safer? Tom Albrecht responded: > > SALT I is still in effect and both the Soviets and the US agreed to abide > by the language of SALT II even though the thing was never ratified. So > how come the Soviets are deploying new weapons if they're the peacelovers > you make them out to be? Arms control agreements are no good if > either side has no intentions of living up to them. And apparently the > Soviets have no intention. > 1)Not only has Reagan not achieved a single arms control agreement in 5 years, he has opposed *every* arms control agreement ever negotiated by past Presidents over the last 20 years, whether they were negotiated by Republican or Democratic presidents. If Reagan had his way we would still be poisoned by strontium-90 from atmospheric nuclear tests. 2)Reagan *has* to this date complied with SALT II but very reluctantly. He's been so reluctant that even at the Geneva Summit when he had the chance to confirm SALT II compliance as some minimal "agreement" with Gorbachev he refused to do so. He has indicated that he may very will violate SALT II in the next year. Moreover the Reagan administration has also indicated that they may violate the ABM treaty as it has been interpreted by both the Soviets and the original negotiators of the ABM treaty. Gerard Smith, Nixon's (note a *Republican* President), ABM negotiator has stated that Reagan administration statements on possible testing of ABM components expressly violated the ABM treaty as he negotiated it. 3)In the summer of 1984 the Senate voted overwhelmingly to ask the Reagan administration to submit the Peaceful Nuclear Explosions Treaty and the Threshold Test Ban Treaty to the Senate for ratification. These treaties were completed long ago and merely await formal ratification. So far Reagan has refused to submit them for ratification. The House just echoed the Senate vote with a similar resolution. 4)Besides refusing to join the Soviet moratorium on nuclear testing Reagan has also refused to join the Soviet moratorium on anti-satellite weapons testing. The Congress has cutoff funds for any tests against "objects" in space, effectively joining the Soviet moratorium on antisatellite weapons testing despite Reagan's opposition. Now, however, in a classic style of deceit, the Reagan Administration has announced that the Pentagon will conduct anti-satellite weapons testing against *lightsources* in space. Since "lightsources" are not "objects" the Reagan administration has announced such tests are not a violation of the Congressional ban on funding. I will respond to your other points in another article. tim sevener whuxn!orb