Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!att!cbnews!military From: gmp@rayssd.RAY.COM (Gregory M. Paris) Newsgroups: sci.military Subject: Re: Short range missiles in Europe Message-ID: <6745@cbnews.ATT.COM> Date: 20 May 89 03:17:21 GMT References: <6679@cbnews.ATT.COM> Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM Organization: Raytheon Submarine Signal Division Lines: 28 Approved: military@att.att.com From: gmp@rayssd.RAY.COM (Gregory M. Paris) In <6679@cbnews.ATT.COM> esco@tank.uchicago.edu (ross paul weiner) writes: >range missiles in Europe now for NATO are 88 Lance missiles with a range of >about 66 miles. The plan is to replace them with weapons that would still have >a range of less than the 300 nm limit set by the INF treaty. That way in the >event of war the weapons would not have to impact on West German soil. It says >something about the effectiveness of modern propaganda, a technological tool as >much as anything discussed in this newsgroup (PSYOPS), that millions of Germans >are demonstrating against an effort to replace very short range, old and rather >more dangerous weapons with something better. Because a missile has a range of 300 miles does not mean that it will be targeted at something 300 miles away. I feel sort of silly saying that! Presumably the missiles would be aimed at invading Warsaw Pact forces that in all likelihood would be on West German soil. Still, even if NATO were to spare both Germanies (I believe that many West Germans consider both the FRG and GDR to be Germany), why would the Warsaw Pact? Once nukes are launched, I'd say that all bets are off and Germany is probably going to get hit hard. But then, am I just a victim of propaganda? -- Greg Paris {decuac,necntc,spdcc,sun,uiucdcs,ukma}!rayssd!gmp