AccessMyLibrary provides FREE access to over 30 million articles from top publications available through your library.
Create a link to this page
Copy and paste this link tag into your Web page or blog:
The U.S. nuclear deterrent worked for 40 years against the Soviets, so why won't it work now against lesser powers, armed with drastically fewer nuclear weapons than Moscow? Once the cruder, practical arguments against a U.S. missile defense are cleared away-it simply won't work, it's too expensive, etc.-the most sophisticated and best case against a defense hangs on this argument: Nuclear deterrence worked without a missile defense for decades, making a defense now at best superfluous, at worst a destabilizing force.
This argument has been made, in various forms, by Michael Kinsley, Thomas Friedman, Robert Wright, Christopher Hitchens, and a slew of Democratic ...
Source: HighBeam Research, Deterrence, but Updated: Where missile defense comes in-crucially.