Abstract
I call upon the scientific community in our country, those who gave us nuclear weapons, to turn their talents now to the cause of mankind and world peace, to give us the means of rendering these nuclear weapons impotent and obsolete.1
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
David Alan Rosenberg, ‘The Origins of Overkill: Nuclear Weapons and American Strategy, 1945–1960’, International Security, Spring 1983, p. 32.
Secretary of Defense James Schlesinger, Annual Defense Department Report Fr 1975, 4 March 1974, p. 67.
One of the most effective who also put great stress on the potential of ABM technology was Don Brennan. See, for example, his ‘The Case for Population Defense’, in Johan Holst and William Schneider (eds), Why Anal? Policy Issues in the Missile Defense Controversy ( New York: Pergamon Press, 1969 ).
We continue treaty-permitted R and D on Ballistic Missile Defense as a hedge against Soviet breakthroughs or breakouts that could threaten our retaliatory capability, and as a possible point defense option to enhance the survivability of our ICBM force, Secretary of Defense Harold Brown, Department of Defense Annual Report, Fiscal Year 1982 (Washington Dc: usGPO, 19 January 1981 ), p. 116.
Lt-General James Abrahamson, Testimony to the Defense Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee (11 May 1984). Richard Cooper, Director of DARPA told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (26 April 1984): ‘If we decided say in 1995 or the year 2000 to do this it would take us 10–20 years to put it in place’.
See, for example, General T. R. Milton USAF (Ret.), ‘Talking Real Money’, Air Force Magazine, July 1984.
See Lawrence Freedman, ‘Europe and the ABM Revival’ in Ian Bellany and Coit Blacker (eds), Antiballistic Missile Defence in the 1980s ( London: Frank Cass, 1983 ).
Quoted in the Washington Times, 19 June 1984. The two most substantial critical studies are the report prepared by the Union of Concerned Scientists, Space-based Missile Defense (Cambridge, Mass.: March 1983) and Ashton B. Carter, Directed Energy Missile Defense in Space (Washington DC: Congress of the United States, Office of Technology Assessment, April 1984).
James A. Thomson, Strategic Defense and Deterrence, Statement before the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee (9 May 1984).
Dr James Fletcher, Statement before the Subcommittee on Research and Development of the Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives (I March 1984).
Strobe Talbot, Deadly Gambits: The Reagan Administration and the Stalemate in Nuclear Arms Control ( New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1984 ), p. 320.
Editor information
Copyright information
© 1985 International Institute for Strategic Studies
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Freedman, L. (1985). The ‘Star Wars’ Debate: The Western Alliance and Strategic Defence: Part II. In: O’Neill, R. (eds) New Technology and Western Security Policy. International Institute for Strategic Studies Conference Papers. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-08194-3_16
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-08194-3_16
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-08196-7
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-08194-3
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)