ARMS-D-Request@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU (Moderator) (01/26/86)
Arms-Discussion Digest Sunday, January 26, 1986 12:24PM
Volume 6, Issue 34
Today's Topics:
Diplomatic Rights
microseconds? no, minutes will do nicely
The Budget, Defense & Human Resources
Issue #25 never existed (note from Moderator)
shoot the instigator
Defense and Human Resources
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 24 Jan 86 18:26 PST
From: William Daul / McDonnell-Douglas / APD-ASD <WBD.MDC@OFFICE-1.ARPA>
Subject: Diplomatic Rights
It seems that the Soviet Embassy must have alot of sophisticated equipment
inside. How do they get it there? Do they go down to the local Radio Shack
and buy the parts, or ship it in from the USSR? Are there limitations on what
they bring in? Could they bring in a nuclear device? Signed, --Curious
------------------------------
Date: 1986 January 24 13:46:18 PST (=GMT-8hr)
From: Robert Elton Maas <REM@IMSSS> (this host known locally only)
Subject:microseconds? no, minutes will do nicely
Reply-to: REM%IMSSS@SU-SCORE.ARPA
H> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 86 12:08:56 est
H> From: Walter Hamscher <hamscher@mit-htvax>
H> Subject: Unreleased SDIO Computing Panel Report
H> Hundreds of satellites, battle stations, sensors, giant space mirrors
H> and other devices would be involved. Computations must be made, and
H> orders must be given, in a matter of microseconds, with continuous
H> updates and revisions.
You gotta be kidding (unless you mean 50,000 or more microseconds).
You have any idea how long it takes light to travel round trip from a
satellite over USSR to central computer to battle stations to another
satellite that detects decoys to central computer to final battle
station? That would be something like 10,000 miles total at the very
minimum, which takes light 10,000/186,000 seconds which is about
50,000 microseconds. Could you rephrase that as tens of milliseconds
instead of microseconds?? Or are you saying you need a-few-microsecond
response time and at best can bet 50,000 microsecond response time so
SDI is impossible? I think response time measured in minutes would be
quite enough. It takes ICBMs 30 minutes to make their trip, so if we
take 5 minutes to plan and execute our coast-phase interception and
another 10 minutes to assess that and plan our terminal-phase
interception, we still have 15 minutes spare to twiddle our thumbs
waiting for the terminal phase to occur.
Disclaimer: I don't particularily like the recent trend toward putting long
disclaimers at the end of each network message, but it seems to be the latest
fad and I don't want to seem like some weirdo who doesn't follow trends, so
I've decided to join the bandwagon. Watch this spot for more trivia.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 86 11:43:27 EST
From: Herb Lin <LIN@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Subject: The Budget, Defense & Human Resources
once again, I must ask: Why is the percentage of the GNP or of the
Federal Budget that is spent on the military relevant to any debate
over whether or not we are spending "enough"?
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1986 16:57 EST
From: LIN@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
Subject: Issue #25 never existed...
In the transition from MC to XX, #25 got lost and was never found.
Sorry. Things should be much smoother now that MC is no longer
handling ARMS-D. We should all express appreciation to SRA@MIT-XX for
managing the bulk of the hassle involved in transfer.
------------------------------
Date: 26 Jan 86 00:46 EST (Sun)
From: _Bob <Carter@RUTGERS>
Subject: shoot the instigator
From: Jim Hofmann <hofmann at AMSAA.ARPA>
That in case of a nuclear war, the people who authorize the button
to be pushed on our side will automatically gain a bullet in the
head.
This kind of scurrilous KKK-style nonsense has no place in ARMS-D.
You Hoffman, should d*mned well know better than to send it. The
fact that it is allegedly reproduced from someplace else is no
excuse.
And you, Moderator, were asleep at the switch when you let it by.
Wake up. Advocating murder don't qualify as serious discussion of
defense issues in anybody's book.
_B
------------------------------
Date: 26 Jan 86 9:53-EST
From: Samuel McCracken <oth104%BOSTONU.bitnet@WISCVM.arpa>
Subject: Defense and Human Resources
-----
The relative proportions do not speak to the question "How much is enough?"
except as some argue that we don't have enough money to fund both an adequate
welfare system and a particular program of defense. Or as some people argue
that the present administration is wildly militarist because it spends so much
on arms and so little on welfare. I do not remember the precise context in
which I originally raised the issue.
------------------------------
End of Arms-Discussion Digest
*****************************