renner@uiucdcs.UUCP (renner ) (02/07/84)
#N:uiucdcs:29200080:000:973
uiucdcs!renner Feb 6 18:52:00 1984
Recent articles have questioned the accuracy of polls which determine
public support for a nuclear arms freeze. The issue is not only the
phrasing of the pollster's question. For me, the entire question
hinges on the definition of "verifiable." I will support a mutual
nuclear arms freeze, so long as the verification procedures specify
on-site inspections by American military officers on demand. One might
usefully include reporters and Congressmen in the group of inspectors.
However, I refuse to entrust America's existance to the Soviets or to spy
satellites.
Now, some interesting questions: How many of the 80% supporting the freeze
have the same definition of verification? Is this the definition Congress
has in mind? If so, why haven't they said so -- vague references to
"verifiable" make me nervous. Most importantly, what possible reason (other
than an intention to cheat) could the Soviets have to object?
Scott Renner
{ihnp4,pur-ee}!uiucdcs!renner