> That said, there are still many cases in which having a not-perfect
> defensive shield encourages attacks, and many in which it encourages
> potential attackers to invest in an arms race.
I can see how a determined enemy may engage in an arms race in order to
overcome a shield perceived as being penetrable, but how does an
imperfect shield engcourage attacks? It has long been an axiom of
statecraft that showing *weakness* is what encourages attack, and "Who
desires peace should prepare for war."
Even a very poor ABM system could succeed by encouraging potential
attackers to seek other means of imposing their will, and it seems very
unlikely that an opponent of limited resources would choose to confront
the defense directly.
To believe that a shield would invite attack seems to require a
remarkable degree of doublethink.
-- Doug Jones, Rocket Plumber
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:39:50 MDT