Word: deterring
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: during 1960-1969
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
Claiming that the U.S. has a 6-1 edge over the Union in ready nuclear strike power, Piel asserted that only a modest-sized force is necessary to deter an any from striking first. He stated there is not, nor was there ever, any missile or bomber gap; and hinted that only "vested interests" keep giant industries devoted to armaments...
...decision to change from a policy of finite deterent to one of massive counter-force, Mr. Hughes emphasized, has come only recently. In effect the United States will now build nuclear power capable, of in air force terminology, of "winning" a thermonuclear war. American force will not only be strong enough to wipe out all Soviet missle basis in a fist strike. But, even after U.S. first-line bases have been attacked, U.S. power will be capable of destroying cities in a second major blow. In the past, Hughes stressed, American strategy had relied on a minimum force, sufficient...
...until recently an important part of Soviet strategy, threatened by spying U-2 planes and satellites the Soviets would have to develop bombs with so much "bounce to the ounce" that the possibility of even a fear of their bombs getting through an American strike would be enough to deter an attack from...
There is nothing of the runaway king here. This does not deter Commentator Kinbote, who charges darkly that Shade's wife blocked every mention of Zembla out of personal pique, and sets out to fill in the story Shade left out. Leaping with no excuse at all from inoffensive phrases in the poem, Kinbote plunges into lengthy accounts of the Zemblan king's idyllic boyhood, his pederastic youth, his glorious escape during the revolution, and the academic education that allowed the incognito expatriate to land a lecturing job at Appalachia University in New Wye, U.S.A...
...NATO for its own security, said succinctly last week: "A coherent policy cannot call for both our presence and our absence." The U.S. argues that even a "modest" nuclear deterrent will prove prohibitively expensive for France with the rapid sophistication of delivery systems and will not in fact deter a major power. If such a modest striking force were ever deployed against Russia, it would have little strategic effect, but would almost certainly prompt devastating retaliation. In short, even if France were able to tear off an aggressor's arm (more likely, in the foreseeable future, its nuclear force...