The answer to the question of whether nuclear war is probable or even possible is vital in estimating our situation. As far as nuclear war is concerned, our Department of Defense has become a department of deterrence. We have virtually no civil defense and no sense of urgency about developing an active defense against nuclear missiles. If, despite deterrence, nuclear war is even reasonably possible, we ought to change both postures; for in our present condition a Soviet first strike probably would kill over 100 million Americans.
The simplest and best known historical pattern is the recurrence of war through the ages. Is there any reason to assume that nuclear war will be different because of the horrendous damage it would inflict? Not when another historical pattern is pondered: Man has used every weapon he has ever devised. Until and including atomic weapons, there has not been a single exception to the rule. Put the two patterns together, and unless nuclear weapons are superseded by arms either more lethal or capable of destroying nuclear missiles, it takes no crystal ball to see that sooner or later nuclear war is probable.





Comments