Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!nrl-cmf!ukma!psuvm.bitnet!cunyvm!nyser!itsgw!brspyr1!miket
From: miket@brspyr1.BRS.Com (Mike Trout)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Re: extravagant highway systems
Summary: just toolin' down Interstate 687...
Message-ID: <5208@brspyr1.BRS.Com>
Date: 4 Jan 89 17:30:11 GMT
References: <204@imspw6.UUCP> <5141@brspyr1.BRS.Com> <1021@clsib21.UUCP> <6453@fluke.COM>
Organization: BRS Info Technologies, Latham NY
Lines: 50

In article <6453@fluke.COM>, kurt@tc.fluke.COM (Kurt Guntheroth) writes:

> Guess what.  Our extravagant highway system (at least the network of
> interstate highways) is precisely designed for military transport.  It is
> designed to rapidly move large defensive forces across the vast expanse of
> the united states to repel evil enemy invaders.  Have a look at the
> authorizing legislation, passed just after WWII.

Well, that was sort of the original idea, and that's the approach that had to
be taken in the language of the legislation.  But there was actually quite a
controversy about this at the time.  A lot of folks expected that when
complete, the Interstate Highway System would be virtually unused by the
public, and that crews would have to walk the highways pulling weeds out of the
cracks.  This was expected partly because the roads were accused of going "from
nowhere to nowhere", and partly because it was expected that the motoring
public would not want to get tangled up with the giant military convoys that
were expected to be frequently using the roads.  There was some talk that
during major military maneuvers (which were quite frequent in those days) all
Interstates might be closed to the public anyway.  I remember some
anti-Interstate magazine ads with artist's conceptions of completed
Interstates, with not a single vehicle visible from horizon to horizon.  As a
result of the controversy, there were some minor redesigns of some of the major
Interstate rights of way, to better serve public transportation needs.  It
wasn't too long before it was realized that US automobile traffic was growing
at a virtually uncontrollable rate and the Interstate system would help
accommodate the demand for new highways.  The military function was slowly
forgotten and the Interstate Defense Highway System quietly became the
Interstate Highway System.  If only we knew then what we know now...

It is often overlooked that although US WW2 production was of truly titantic
quantity, moving the stuff and troops around within this admittedly gigantic
nation was also a gargantuan task.  For example, although over 300,000
(yes, 300,000!) airplanes were built in the USA, probably less than a third of
them left our shores.  It's not much of an exaggeration when people say that we
couldn't have won the war without our railroads.  But the war virtually wore
out the US railroad system, and the military wanted a transport backup, thus
part of the reason for the Interstate Defense Highway idea.  But as has been
stated before, well-developed transport systems aid invaders as well as
defenders.

> Why is this in comp.misc?

Why not?  This group is so catch-all anyway.  Maybe we should start
misc.transportation...

--
NSA food:  Iran sells Nicaraguan drugs to White House through CIA, DIA & NRO.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Michael Trout (miket@brspyr1)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
BRS Information Technologies, 1200 Rt. 7, Latham, N.Y. 12110  (518) 783-1161
"God forbid we should ever be 20 years without...a rebellion." Thomas Jefferson