Forums

[Adder]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
I happen to like toys, and view the march of technology as unavoidable. In a world where MAD prevails, SDI could upset the equilibrium and make the world more dangerous; I'm not sure MAD prevails anymore.

Reagan's star wars program was, for the most part, a conscious rejection of MAD and a switch to a concept of winnable nuclear war; that made about as much sense as the Rumsfeld Doctrine, especially given the time and technology. But, as I said, the march of technology is unavoidable, and we're not in a MAD world, and this is technology that will progress somewhere. And, in retrospect, I'd give Star Wars this bit of credit -- spending like a drunken sailor on defense played some small role (less than many would claim, but still some) in the break-up of the Soviet Union.

But if I'm budgeting, I'm expecting the rogue country to bring in the nukes via suicide bomber, since the delivery mechanisms to cross either the Atlantic or Pacific are probably a tougher thing to build these days than the bomb itself. And that would affect my priorities.

I am not sure that MAD is as dead as you suggest. Obviously, it is no deterrent to stateless terrorists, but it is alive an kicking to pretty much every state in the world. Which is why the ones that we don't like are all so busy trying to get nukes.