On Sat, 21 Jul 2001, Doug Jones wrote:
> To believe that a shield would invite attack seems to require a
> remarkable degree of doublethink.
If my potential adversary is developing a shield, my first thought would
be 1) invent technologies allowing me to circumvent it 2) make more nukes
cum delivery vehicles, so I can saturate your shield's capabilities (and
because I don't know your shield's capabilities, since lacking a RL test,
I will make as many as are financially feasible, just to be on the safe
side). Do you think that both 1) and 2) are desirable, from either point
of view?
I'm fond of things that go boom, but I think we need less nukes, not more
of them. Neolithic firmware and nuclear weapons don't mix.
On the whole, this whole discussion abundantly proves the point that we
can't handle nukes.
-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://www.lrz.de/~ui22204/">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBMTO : N48 10'07'' E011 33'53'' http://www.lrz.de/~ui22204
57F9CFD3: ED90 0433 EB74 E4A9 537F CFF5 86E7 629B 57F9 CFD3
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:39:56 MDT