The New Nuclear ; under Bush, Missile Defense Is for New Foes. 'Assured Destruction' Still Holds for Old Ones

By Peter Grier writer of The Christian Science Monitor | The Christian Science Monitor, May 8, 2001 | Go to article overview

The New Nuclear ; under Bush, Missile Defense Is for New Foes. 'Assured Destruction' Still Holds for Old Ones


Peter Grier writer of The Christian Science Monitor, The Christian Science Monitor


President Bush's push for missile defenses would change - but not eliminate - the "theology" of nuclear standoff with which the United States has calculated its national security ever since the Soviet Union acquired its own atomic arsenal some 40 years ago.

In his speech last week at the National Defense University, Mr. Bush referred to mutually assured destruction (MAD), the basic tenet of this theology, as a grim relic of another era. His implication: In a defense-dominated nuclear world, MAD would be as obsolete as bomb shelters, civil defense sirens, and the cold war itself.

Maybe some day. The hard reality of the situation is that, absent a perfect shield, the logic of MAD will remain an integral part of strategic arithmetic. Bush, as so many presidents before him, will be forced to grabble with the difficult moral realization that the safety of the US populace depends at least in part on allowing them to remain vulnerable to Armageddon.

Under the administration's plan "we're downsizing MAD, but we're not casting it aside," says Michael Krepon, a senior security analyst at the Stimson Center in Washington.

The MAD theory has its roots in the early 1960s, when US officials first struggled with the notion that nuclear weapons were far more than just extra-powerful regular bombs. The catastrophic damage that would be caused by even one thermonuclear weapon meant that war plans needed to focus not on the best way to fight nuclear war, but on the best way to prevent it from ever beginning.

The Pentagon first moved to adopt "assured destruction" as its strategy during the tenure of Robert McNamara, Lyndon Johnson's secretary of Defense. The concept was simple: The US and the Soviet Union would never attack one another with nuclear weapons if both realized that, if they did so, they would inevitably be struck with a devastating strike in return.

It took a nuclear theorist from outside the government, Donald Brennan of the Hudson Institute, to publicize the ethical difficulties of this position. He slapped "mutual" on "assured destruction", coining the acronym MAD, and pronounced himself opposed to living under a nuclear sword of Damocles.

"We should not deliberately create a system in which millions of innocent civilians would, by intention, be exterminated in a failure of the system," he wrote.

Popular culture satirized MAD as a mutual suicide pact, most notably in Stanley Kubrick's film "Dr. Strangelove."

But Strangelovian or not, MAD remains the foundation of the way the US regards nuclear weapons today.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

The New Nuclear ; under Bush, Missile Defense Is for New Foes. 'Assured Destruction' Still Holds for Old Ones
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.