[net.politics] Re : Re: Re: Disarm. & Foreign Policy

tonjon@fluke.UUCP (Tony Johnson) (09/25/84)

do I pretend to have the solution to the arms race.  But then,
	I can't pretend that disarmament is a good idea either (and you think
	Reagan's got quite an imagination to believe in the START talks)!!!

	These comments reflect my own opinion and do not express those of my
	employer, John Fluke Mfg. Co. Inc.

					Tony Johnson
					Everett, WA.

orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) (10/05/84)

> do I pretend to have the solution to the arms race.  But then,
> 	I can't pretend that disarmament is a good idea either (and you think
> 	Reagan's got quite an imagination to believe in the START talks)!!!
> 
> 					Tony Johnson
> 					Everett, WA.

I am not quite sure I understand the point here.  However I think it
is totally inaccurate for militarists like Ronald Reagan to talk
about arms control or the Nuclear Freeze representing "disarmament".
As much as I would like to see disarmament take place, the Nuclear
Freeze proposal does not call for disarmament-no weapons would be
deleted from either superpowers huge stockpile.  The Nuclear Freeze
just calls for a halt to the arms race-given 50,000 nuclear weapons
that is way more than enough-why don't both sides stop now!
Tim Sevener
whuxl!orb

medin@ucbvax.ARPA (Milo Medin) (10/14/84)

50K weapons are more than enough?  More than enough for what?
Those 50K are very diverse systems indeed, you cant make a 
blanket statement like that? You make no mention of accuracy
or throweight or many otheer important details.  As for freezing us
into inadaquacy and old unreliable systems such as the B-52,
I say no thank you.  Try not to be so simplistic, it tends to
make you look unintelligent.


				Milo