peterr@utcsri.UUCP (Peter Rowley) (07/23/85)
There are a number of things people seem to be missing about the SDI:
- the system would not appear all at once nor be invulnerable while it is
being built. If the USSR put up such a system, thereby threatening the
US nuclear deterrent, don't you think there would be popular sentiment
for pre-emptive moves against the system?
- the system would not be invulnerable when it is operational. If you
wanted to get the most warheads through, during a first strike,
wouldn't you simply disable the SDI system, say, with killer satellites?
- there are a number of forces that push the superpowers to a "use it or
lose it" position. For example, it is entirely possible that even an
incredibly small first strike would "decapitate" the leadership of a
country; this is one of the main USSR fears about the Pershings in
Europe: in only 6 minutes, the Moscow leadership can be eliminated.
Secondly, even a small first strike could produce a powerful electro-
magnetic pulse (EMP) effect, possibly wiping out most if not all command/
control systems, rendering remaining missiles impotent. There is thus
a great tendency for countries to launch everything once they think an
attack is underway. And an SDI system provides a disturbingly available
"attack underway" signal.
An SDI would succeed in militarizing the US economy further, might provide
some technological spin-offs, and would certainly increase (or moderate
any decrease in) the US deficit, keeping interest rates high and the
unemployment rates high.
If you want a research programme, surely there are more imaginative
avenues of pursuit... for people who want to explore space, why not put
ALL the money into exploration? If you need a fiction to rally the
public and politicians around (so they won't mind spending the money),
how about the vast quantities of minerals on Mars or the Moon? They
are much less illusory than the promises of SDI.
Of course, we might do something silly like massive appropriate
technology R&D for the developing countries, to end hunger and (for you
entrepeneurs out there) open up huge new markets... just think of how
many people have never used VisiCalc!
For more arguments against SDI, including the fact that it was all debated
before, in the late 60's (then, it was called ABM), see George Ball's
April 11, 1985 article in The New York Review of Books.
peter rowley
{allegra, cornell, decvax, ihnp4, linus, utzoo}!utcsri!peterr