Re[2]: MAHAN ready for a “nuclear free” debate?
January 2nd, 2009 From
>X-Sender: dave@microworks.net
>X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
>Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 08:17:33 -0700
>To: “Bill Riddle”
> Markus Stumptner
>From: Dave Riddle
>Subject: Re: Re[2]: MAHAN ready for a “nuclear free” debate?
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>
>At 04:58 PM 9/8/97 GMT, Bill Riddle wrote:
> > Actually, this list was set up as a forum for Naval History … not
> > strategy or technology or anything else … except as they relate
> > historically, of course.
> >
> > Still, if one wanted to post a note comparing historical
> > head-in-the-sandism (US ’30s isolationism jumps right to the front
> > here) and present day “nuclear free” head-in-the-sandism, it would
> > seem valid to me.
> >
> > Comments Dave?
>
>I am not “really” a moderator here.
>
>
> >
> > On the subject of “nuclear free zones” … All such feel-good
> > pronouncements are, in my mind, counterproductive. Such as posting a
> > sign in front of a school that says “Drug Free Zone.” At best it is
> > harmless visual pollution. At worst it would engender a false sense
> > of security. In actuality I am sure it means nothing at all.
> >
> > Of course, as I understand the practice, the local government (NZ,
> > Denmark, San Francisco, whoever) declares its territory to be “Nuke
> > Free.” Then the USN adheres to its well established policy of making
> > no statements on the subject, and the local government doesn’t push
> > the issue. And if you think the Navy downloads weapons before making
> > a port call, I have some ocean front property in Maricopa County I
> > would like to sell you.
> >
> > Bill Riddle
> >
> >
> >______________________________ Reply Separator
>_________________________________
> >Subject: Re: MAHAN ready for a “nuclear free” debate?
> >Author: Markus Stumptner
> >Date: 9/8/97 11:12 AM
> >
> >
> >I thought this was a mailing list dealing with naval strategy
> >and technology, not one about “barbecuing” political dissenters.
> >
> > Markus
> >
> >
> >
> >