One Must Take Draconian Measures Of Demographic

Elimination Of Nuclear Weapons, So Naive, So Simplistic, And So Idealistic As To Be Quixotic? Some May Think So. But As Human Beings, Citizens Of Nations With Power To Influence Events In The World, Can We Be At Peace With Ourselves If We Strive For Less? I Think Not.

A Computer Does Not Substitute For Judgment Any More Than A Pencil Substitutes For Literacy. But Writing Without A Pencil Is No Particular Advantage.

The 'realist' Conception Of Continuing Old-fashioned 'balance Of Power' Politics May Have Been Well Founded In The Past, But It Is Inconsistent With Our Increasing Interdependent World. On Moral Grounds Alone There Can Be No Justification For The 20th Century Level Of Killing. To Settle Disputes Without Violence Must Become The Primary Goal Of Foreign Policy For Every Nation.

Neither Conscience Nor Sanity Itself Suggests That The United States Is, Should Or Could Be The Global Gendarme.

...but Highly Placed Sources Within The Kennedy Administration Disagreed: "[t]he Assumption That The Strategic Nuclear Balance Mattered In Any Way Was Wrong... As Far As I Am Concerned, It Made No Difference... If My Memory Serves Me Correctly, We Had Some Five Thousand Strategic Nuclear Warheads As Against T Heir Three Hundred. Can Anyone Seriously Tell Me That Their Having Three Hundred And Forty Would Have Made Any Difference? The Military Balance Wasn't Changed. I Didn't Believe It Then, And I Don't Believe It Now..."