🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <8081@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU>, ajdenner@athena.mit.edu (Alexander J Denner) writes:

> 	I do not think this <adding Soviet sites to the UUCP network> would be
> a very good idea.  [...]
> Although I have nothing against the Russin people, the Soviets are NOT our
> friends.

Would you like to change that situation, or would you prefer to remain
non-friends?  If you seek change, how would you achieve it?  Politico-economic
pressure?  Nuke the bastards?  Invade them?  Diplomacy?  Bribery?
Carrot-and-stick?  If you prefer to remain non-friends, prepare to spend
an increasing percentage of our national resources on maintaining this
adversarial relationship.  Not an easy choice, in any event.  Perhaps we need
to re-think many of our most ingrained attitudes--such as our (and the
Soviets') perverse need for a convenient enemy that we can blame our own
mistakes on.

> The Soviet KGB has an immense information gathering network in this country,
> why make it easier for them to tune into western scientific thought?

Sorry, but we live in a democracy, and that's one of the prices we must pay.
The Soviets won't have any trouble obtaining what they want, whether they use
the net or not.  I would wager a guess that the amount of truly useful
information that passes over public networks is extremely minuscule.  Most
information classified is done so for the purpose of keeping it from the
American people, not the from the Soviets.  You may rest assured that the
Soviets have had for years all the information they need about the Stealth
Bomber, for example.  The only people who don't know Stealth details are the
American people, and that's to keep us from knowing the true amount of money
that's disappeared down that rat hole.  Bear in mind the truly awesome
accomplishments of the Soviet intelligence services in World War 2,
accomplishments achieved against the rather un-democratic Third Reich.  I'm
glad we had those folks on OUR side, thank you.

> Andrei Sakahrov has just said that the changes are only superficial.

So we are to take the word of just one person (albeit a very prestigious one)?
While I would agree that too much is being made of changes in the USSR, those
changes give the world a golden opportunity to pour oil on some long-troubled
waters.

> I do not think that he [sic?] can trust the Soviet government at all.

I don't think we can trust ANY government at all, including that of the USA.
Who says we have to trust the USSR, anyway?  Speak softly and carry a big
stick.

> (Even if one believes that Gorbachev is really sincere and wants to destroy
> all weapons on the Earth,

I'm sure he knows that is unrealistic.  What he knows is that his nation's
economy is in danger of total collapse, and if something isn't done to divert
resorces away from the Soviet military-industrial complex their massive war
machine will rot from within anyway.  And don't forget that with over 21
million Soviets killed in World War 2, they are the most anti-war people on
this planet.  But they will also behave like a cornered rat if we nudge them
into that particular mind-set.

> it is very possible that he will be overthrown by conservatives who wil
> return to the "old" way.)

Good point, but this will NOT happen if Gorbachev's policies WORK.  Currently
things don't look good.  I think it's in the world's best interest for us to
help the guy out.  Let's start feeding him some of our western-style free
flow of information and see if we can shake things up even more.  Hook up the
net!  The more Soviet sites the better!  Let the Soviet people have an
ever-increasing dose of Western thought!

> I think that we have seen how the Soviets have cut research costs by copying
> our Shuttle,

It is NOT a copy.  It looks similar (would you care to show me a hypothetical
shuttle design that doesn't?), but there are substantial internal
differences--such as the fact that the Soviet orbiter does not have main rocket
engines of its own, but it does have booster jets to assist with landing.  But
it is true that the Soviets do copy our stuff from time to time, such as with
the An-124 being a copy of the C-5.  It works both ways, though--our F-5 was
basically a feeble copy of the MiG-21, and our F-16 is (or, rather, was) an
attempt to duplicate the light-weight, low-cost, super-maneuverable aspects of
MiG designs such as the MiG-17 and -21.  Believe me, even as we speak US
designers are frantically trying to duplicate (within some kind of economic
reality) the successes of such Soviet missiles as the AA-9, AA-10, SA-10, and
SA-12.

> why let them get so much information so easily?

See above.  I wasn't aware that critical information about such things as
shuttles was being transmitted over the net.  If they want such information,
they can get it easily without bothering with the net.

Two superpowers capable of reducing each other to radioactive slag have two
options: push the button or try to develop a better understanding of each
other's viewpoints.  The more information that flows back and forth the better
off we'll both be.  Public access networks could be the most powerful anti-war
weapons the USA has.  Let's use them.

--
NSA food:  Iran sells Nicaraguan drugs to White House through CIA, DIA & NRO.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Michael Trout (miket@brspyr1)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
BRS Information Technologies, 1200 Rt. 7, Latham, N.Y. 12110  (518) 783-1161
"God forbid we should ever be 20 years without...a rebellion." Thomas Jefferson