Advertisement

'Weapons in Space'

January 06, 1985

Your editorial pointed out various pros and cons with regards to the "Star Wars" concept and satellite killers being devised by the United States. The editorial states that "arms control talks in Geneva will succeed only if a search is made for a formula that would reduce the threat of nuclear war by reducing the number of nuclear missiles on both sides.

On that point, I ask the following. When will our leaders and or the people who write the editorials realize what really is the cause for the arms buildup? The cause is simple . . . 600,000-plus U.S. troops and a couple thousand nuclear missiles on the continent of Europe, or in other words, in Russia's front yard.

Has anyone thought to consider how America would react if Canada requested a half-million Soviet troops and a few thousand missiles to be stationed on Canadian soil for defensive purposes? I'll venture to guess that the United States would be a bit concerned for its welfare.

Forty-five years ago, the Soviet Union became involved in a war that ultimately cost tens of millions of its citizens lives in addition to the destruction of a great deal of its industries and land. The Soviet Union is still ruled by people who fought in and lost family members in that war. It is still a vivid memory to many citizens. No matter what our motives are for having a great concentration of troops and arms in Europe, our presence looks a lot like the situation in 1939, when it was Hitler's Third Reich that had the big numbers in troops and arms.

No longer can countries defend continents or nations that are thousands of miles away, like was done in World War II, especially when nuclear missiles can travel across oceans in a matter of minutes. I do not want to be "nuked" in my own home while watching a football game because the Soviet Union decides to attack a country 9,000 miles from my neighborhood.

I am not convinced that the U.S.S.R. wants to invade and occupy Western Europe. I am convinced that they are concerned regarding our troop and missile deployment in Western Europe.

My solution to the arms buildup problem is a simple one. Our President should say to the world that the United States will pull out all troops and either sell or pack up all nuclear missiles from Europe with no strings attached.

If the response to this idea is that our pullout will create an open invitation for Soviet aggression, then consider this point. In the last 2,000 years, how many countries have invaded and occupied the entire continent of Europe or the whole world for that matter? Zero, as in none. So what makes the Soviets so invincible? I do not believe for a minute that the citizens of Great Britain, France and West Germany, to name a few, will lay down to be conquered by anyone. And besides, they all have nuclear capabilities.

Let's relieve a lot of tension in this world by taking care of our own continent and hemisphere, and let the other parts of the world shed their own blood for their own land. It is clear that our only solid response to a Soviet invasion at this time in Western Europe is nuclear. And after we lob a few on them, guess where they will lob a few of their own?

Come on America, let's wake up to the harsh realities of life in the nuclear missile age and stop trying to be the savior of the entire planet.

TIM PARSON Pasadena

Advertisement
Los Angeles Times Articles
|
|
|