[net.politics] Reagan's re-election/European defense

jon@boulder.UUCP (Jon Corbet) (11/22/84)

jcp@brl-tgr.ARPA (Joe Pistritto <jcp>):
>                               But remember all you anti-American-defense
>people in Europe, you have to smile at the Soviet tanks...
>
>	(no fair screaming for US aid AFTER the Russian invasion now!)

So what do all our missiles in Europe do about Soviet tanks?  They give
us one option: destroy Europe to save it.  I suspect this is a large
part of the concern overseas -- they do not feel more secure knowing
that we too can demolish Europe to settle our squabbles with Russia.
Our missiles do not defend Europe from a conventional attack -- they
merely give us a faster way to destroy the Soviet Union.  I think we
should take them out.

--
Jonathan Corbet
National Center for Atmospheric Research, Field Observing Facility
{hplabs|seismo}!hao!boulder!jon

jcp@brl-tgr.ARPA (Joe Pistritto <jcp>) (11/23/84)

In article <249@boulder.UUCP> jon@boulder.UUCP (Jon Corbet) writes:
>
>So what do all our missiles in Europe do about Soviet tanks?  They give
>us one option: destroy Europe to save it.  I suspect this is a large
>part of the concern overseas -- they do not feel more secure knowing
>that we too can demolish Europe to settle our squabbles with Russia.
>Our missiles do not defend Europe from a conventional attack -- they
>merely give us a faster way to destroy the Soviet Union.  I think we
>should take them out.
>
>Jonathan Corbet

Someone obviously hasn't been listening..
The whole point of putting nuclear weapons in Europe is that they could
be used to respond to the Soviet conventional attack scenerio without
using the US based ICBM force.  It IS, (and has been for DECADES), US
policy to respond to Soviet aggression in Europe, (not necessarily
NUCLEAR aggression), with nuclear firepower.  Hence tactical nukes,
hence forward based aircraft with nuclear free-fall weapons, hence
a declared US policy of 'first use'.  That is PRECISELY why the US
will not commit itself to no-first-use as the Soviets have.  They
don't NEED nuclear weapons in Europe, WE do!.  Having forward based
weapons in Europe does make it easier to first-strike the Soviet Union,
but thats NOT the point, (and its only true of the Pershing IIs anyway,
and a similar effect could be obtained, albeit not as easily, from
submarines in the Mediterranian and Baltic Seas).  I believe that
the number of Pershings is on the order of 120.

							-JCP-