New York Times on the Web Forums Science

Missile Defense

Russian military leaders have expressed concern about US plans for a national missile defense system. Will defense technology be limited by possibilities for a strategic imbalance? Is this just SDI all over again?

rshowalter - 03:02pm Jun 30, 2001 EST (#6338 of 6345)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

During the last presidential election, a major effort to get the candidates to talk about nuclear policy, and reductions, was made by the Global Security Institute an organization founded by Michael Gorbachev MD372 rshowalt 10/4/00 4:48am

Many distinguised americans were involved, including McNamara, who signed the appeal MD374 rshowalt 10/4/00 5:08am ... MD375 rshowalt 10/4/00 5:13am
along with many distinguished Americans , and adressed a meeting that, somehow the campaigns found a way to ignore. MD376-377 rshowalt 10/4/00 5:23am

from http://www.gsinstitute.org/rsp/press/10_3.html#top

" The current hair-trigger alert deployment of nuclear weapons directly threatens voters’ personal security while unprecedented opportunities for deep cuts in nuclear arsenals with Russia could provide more safety. Despite their impact on all Americans, the burning nuclear issues facing America and the next president have not been adequately addressed by the candidates. Although some vague proposals on missile defense have been mentioned, neither campaign has articulated its position on the contradiction between the formally stated U.S. policy of relying on nuclear weapons for the foreseeable future and the U.S.’s legal commitments – reiterated as recently as May 19 2000 at the United Nations – to work for the global elimination of nuclear arms."

Well, in its own way, the Bush administration is working on it -- and problems with getting nuclear reductions largely hinges on related issues . So some progress has been made, with much work left to do.

rshowalter - 03:05pm Jun 30, 2001 EST (#6339 of 6345)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Though some of the problems are just problems of communication and others could plainly be assisted by more contact and trade, there are issues from the past that still cast a shadow on the future. Today, Dawn Riley has come up with some important references about these matters.

rshowalter - 03:05pm Jun 30, 2001 EST (#6340 of 6345)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

MD6315 possumdag 6/29/01 10:51pm .... U.S. Planning for War in Europe, 1963-64 Edited by William Burr May 24, 2000

" The release of Cold War-era Soviet and East European documents on war plans and nuclear planning raises questions about U.S. war planning during the same period. A central issue is the degree to which U.S. and NATO planning posited early or initial use of nuclear weapons . . . Certainly, by the 1950s, NATO war plans assumed early use of nuclear weapons, even immediate use under some circumstances.[1] By the 1960s, however, the situation began to change . . . . . Rejecting the idea of "no first use," senior U.S. officials took it for granted that a massive Warsaw Pact conventional attack on Western Europe would prompt a nuclear response from outnumbered Western forces.

( I believe, based on things I saw and was told, that the US also made it its business to make the Russians afraid that we would strike first, "preemptively" -- and with no warning, or necessary precipitating episode. Keeping Russia in fear of this was a major way to push her toward economic collapse. )

MD 6317 lunarchick 6/30/01 12:55am

"How do we evaluate for reliability material produced by individual analysts with their own perspectives, prejudices and political agendas?"

(5 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense