This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: attacker even if it was a mistake and if we made the mistake we posses enough weaponry to still enact fear in the country that was struck accidentally so that they wont strike back. 3. McNamara defeats his argument at the end. He is arguing for the end of nuclear arms as a means of foreign policy and he is advocating the destruction of nuclear arms to prevent an arms race that will emerge in lesser developed more politically unstable countries. He supports his argument very well through the use of extensive facts but at the end states that we need to move toward a “near elimination” of nuclear weapons. This near elimination would still give those states with nuclear weapons an edge in foreign policy and would only revert back to the 60’s when only a few states had weapons but still used them to make policy....
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 02/27/2008 for the course PSCI 2233 taught by Professor N/a during the Spring '07 term at Colorado.
- Spring '07
- International Relations