Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!bionet!agate!ucbvax!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ukma!rutgers!att!cbnews!smb@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com
From: smb@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com (Steven M. Bellovin)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: ** 1972 ABM Treaty **
Message-ID: <6384@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 9 May 89 03:23:17 GMT
References: <6252@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill
Lines: 15
Approved: military@att.att.com


From: smb@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com (Steven M. Bellovin)

In article <6252@cbnews.ATT.COM>, jtrim@orion.cair.du.edu (Jeff Trim) writes:
> Treaty allows Phased-array radars, but only
> on coastal areas of US and USSR and they must face OUTWARDS (out to sea).
> They cannot be near any missiles fields that they could protect and 
> they must be on the coast so that they can be legitimate military
> targets.

It's not that they have to be military targets; it's that they must be
early-warning radars, and not battle management radars.  A radar on the
coast is useful only for spotting stuff that's coming in; a radar inland
has less effective range for early warning, and hence is presumed to
be used to control anti-missle defenses.