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!mhuxn!ihnp4!houxm!whuxl!whuts!orb
From: orb@whuts.UUCP (SEVENER)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Reagan and arms reductions: re to Albrecht
Message-ID: <577@whuts.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 10-Mar-86 10:23:10 EST
Article-I.D.: whuts.577
Posted: Mon Mar 10 10:23:10 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 15-Mar-86 05:22:26 EST
References: <155@jc3b21.UUCP> <1405@mhuxt.UUCP> <560@whuts.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 17

> 
> >If Reagan is truly interested in "arms reductions" then why did he
> >instruct the US to abstain from voting for the UN resolution calling
> >on both sides to negotiate an end to the nuclear arms race in
> >the Geneva Summit?
> 
> Maybe the resolution is meaningless.  Maybe the resolution is merely
> another way to the Communists to press the US to make agreements that
> are not in the interests on the American people.
> 

The resolution was overwhelmingly approved with virtually no dissent,
including positive votes by US allies and nonaligned nations around
the world.  It was unfortunately merely a gesture of support for
meaningful arms control agreements.  But why couldn't the US support
such a gesture?  
         tim sevener  whuxn!orb