Page 4
Daily Nebraskan
Friday, April 23,1982
ymJt w r . 5L
I AY .WW
A
Fear transforms into protest
Several soldiers run through a city park, away from the
center of the blast. When the bomb detonated, they were
close enough to that center to lose their sight. Their melt
ed eyeballs run down their faces and onto their uniforms.
Images like tliis one from John 1 Jersey's Hiroshima
have haunted Americans for almost 40 years. This year,
those images have moved many Americans to action.
According to Newsweek magazine, nuclear-freeze re
solutions have been approved by 33 city councils, 10
county councils and legislative bodies in 1 1 states. This
week protests across the country may involve as many as
10 million to 20 million people in 650 communities and
on 350 college campuses, according to Ground Zero, the
non-partisan group that has organized the effort.
Obviously, a good number of Americans are worried
that nuclear war is a real possibility, not just a rhetorical
device to use against the Soviet Union. Many believe it is
no longer an issue to leave to the decision-makers, and
rightly so.
Ronald Reagan told reporters Tuesday that protestors
must remember he is the only American with "all the
facts necessary to base a decision" on the armament issue.
"Therefore, I would ask their trust and confidence,
that feeling as sincerely as I do, that . . . they would allow
us to take the actions we think are necessary to lessen this
threat," he continued.
In other words, Reagan is asking for blind faith. But
remember, this is the man who has taken money from the
poor, cut aid to education, proposed substantial increases
in the defense budget and made numerous erroneous
statements at presk conferences. And he's asking for our
trust on an issue as far-reaching and possibly devastating
as nuclear armament. If ever there was an issue Americans
should be involved in, it's this one.
Congressmen and senators arc involved, and their plans
vary. Chief among them is a nuclear freeze proposal spon
sored by Sens. Fdward Kennedy , (D-Mass.) and Mark Hat
field, (R-Ore.). Also drawing support is a proposal by
Sens. Henry Jackson, (D-Wash.) and John Warner, (R
Va.), to increase U.S. nuclear forces and then negotiate
balanced reductions with the Russians.
Rep. Morris Udall, (d-Ariz.), has suggested an exchange
of U.S. and Soviet students to safeguard against sneak at
tacks. These students would include the children of gov
ernment leaders on both sides.
In a Newsweek poll conducted in mid-March, 51 per
cent saw their chances of surviving a limited nuclear war
with the Soviet Union as being "poor"; 38 percent belie
ved their chances would be "just 50-50." Only 9 percent
thought their chances would be "good."
People seem to be running scared, but instead of just
running, many are beginning to channel their energy into
protest.
On these two pages, syndicated columnists William
Rusher and Richard Cohen examine the anti-nuclear
movement. Mark Dahmke, a former UNL student and a
computer consultant, discusses an alternate plan for
defense.
Read their comments and suggestions. Examine the
issue. Your involvement could make the difference bet
ween peace and holocaust.
Shields ideal model, not swords
Editor's note: Mark Dahmke, author of
the following opinion, is a member of the
Citizen's Advisory Council on National
Space Policy, a group formed to advise the
president. A former UNL student and a
computer consultant, he is also a consult
ing editor for BYTE and Popular Comput
ing magazines.
Mutually Assured Destruction, appro
priately referred to as MAD, has been the
dominant strategy of the superpowers for
more than 20 years. That means in the
event of an attack launched from either the
United States or the Soviet Union, the re
sult would be the all-out destruction of
both societies. That is, our response to an
attack would be to commit suicide.
Considering the human element and the
fallibility of our machines, I am amazed
that we have survived this long. To any dis
passionate onlooker, the solution to the sit
uation would be to install defensive wea
pons and to assure survival, rather than as
suring destruction.
Recently, I attended a Space Develop
ment Conference sponsored by the L-5
Society, a national organization to pro
mote space development. There, I met re
tired Lt. General Daniel Graham, former
director of the Defense Intelligence Agen
cy. He started Project High Frontier with
private funds, in an attempt to find "a
technological end-run" around the growing
Soviet missile threat. His plan calls for a
layered defense, involving a few short-term,
ones.
The first layer is a system of non-nuclear
anti-missile defenses around our missile
silos, costing about SI billion. This would
take about two or three years to complete
and would make a first strike more diffi
cult for the Soviets.
The next layer would consist of 432 or
biting satellites. Each satellite would carry
a number of non-nuclear heat-seeking pro
jectiles that together could destroy 95 per
cent of all ballistic missiles launched in the
event of an attack. The ring of satellites
would cost about S10 billion to S15 bil
lion (consider the SI 00 billion cost of the
MX missile plan), would use current tech
nology and could realistically be in place
by 1989. The placement and maintenance
of the satellites is made feasible by using
the space shuttle.
This system is not an instant cure. It
will not solve the theater nuclear weapons
problem in Europe. However, it does re
duce the chance of an all-out first strike,
and it costs only a fraction of what more
missiles will cost. The real advantage is that
we would be shifting to a defensive "survi
val" strategy.
Unfortunately, the system does make a
pre-emptive strike more likely during the
time it would take to install it. If the So
viets believed we would soon have a defen
sive system, they might decide to launch an
attack while they still had the opportunity.
We would therefore have to invite the Sovi
ets to build a similar defensive system. We
ino-
might even offer them some of the teel
logy required to build it.
Jn the long run. such defensive systems
could mean the end of nuclear prolifera
tion and the dismantling of an offensive
weapons system that we hope never to use
anyway. Considering the cost of the new
systems, it starts to look very cost effec
tive. According to the 175-page report from
Project High Frontier (which is currently
being studied and considered by the White
House and members of Congress), the lay
ered system could close the window of vul
nerability, shift us away from MAD and
help to open up space development for pri
vate industry.
Amazingly, the Pentagon is not space
happy. It doesn't have plans to put nuclear
weapons in orbit. In fact, we may have to
drag the Pentagon into the space age.
I agree with Michael Getler of the Wash
ington Post when he wrote that Project
High Frontier "would take advantage of a
U.S. edge in space technology, use equip
ment already in development, not require
new American nuclear weapons, and is not
based on attacking missile silos in the Sovi
et Union."
It should be noted that this system is
not based on killing large numbers of Rus
sians. At the conference, science writer Jer
ry Pornelle, said: "The best world model I
can envision is one where everyone has a
shield and no one has a sword." Project
High Frontier can give us that shield.
Nebraskan
Editorials do not necessarily express the
opinions of the Daily Nebraskan's publishers, the
NU Board of Regents, the University of Nebraska
and its employees or the student body.
USPS 144-080
Editor: Martha Murdock; Managing editor:
Janice Pigaga; News editor: Kathy Stokebrand;
Associate news editors: Patti Gallagher, Bob
Glissmann; Editorial assistant: Pat Clark; Night
news editor: Kate Kopischke; Assistant night
news editor: Tom Hassing; Entertainment editor:
Bob Crisler; Sports editor: Larry Sparks; Assist
ant sports editor: Cindy Gardner; Art director:
Dave Luebke; Photography chief: D. Eric Kirch
er; Graphic designer: John G. Goecke.
Copy editors: Mary Ellen Behne, Leslie
Kendrick, Sue MacDonald, Melinda Norris, Patty
Pryor, Peggy Reichardt, Lori Siewert, Michiela
Thuman, Tricia Waters. Rob Wilborn.
Business manager: Anne Shank-Volk; Pro
duction manager: Kitty Policky; Advertising
manager: Art K. Small; Assistant advertising
manager: Jerry Scott.
Publications Board chairperson: Margy Mc
Cleery, 472-2454. Professional adviser: Don
Walton, 473-7301.
The Daily Nebraskan is published by the UNL
Publications Board Monday through Friday
during the fall and spring semesters, except
during vacation. Address: Daily Nebraskan, 34
Nebraska Union, 1400 R St., Lincoln, Neb.,
68588. Telephone: 472-2588.
All material in the Daily Nebraskan is covered
by copyright.
Second class postage paid at Lincoln, Neb.,
68510.
Annual subscription: $20, semester subscrip
tion St 1 .
"POSTMASTER: Send address changes to
Daily Nebraskan, 34 Nebraska Union, 1400 R
St., Lincoln, Neb , 68588."
