Word: nuclear
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: during 1960-1969
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...could bring off. But, as one U.S. journalist warned, it would be "struthious"* folly to ignore the implications of what Khrushchev said. In the same sense, it would be struthious for the U.S. electorate to base its November judgment on the notion that either presidential candidate has discussed the nuclear control issue accurately or fully...
Questions. Said Norstad: "For too long we Americans have worked on the assumption that the nations of Europe would be satisfied, or would have to be satisfied, to leave the nuclear elements of the common defense to U.S. invention, control and direction. For a number of years, Europeans have been addressing two questions to Americans with increasing bluntness and urgency...
...First, since the Europeans depend upon the common defense, and since the NATO military forces in Europe themselves depend to a considerable extent on nuclear weapons, should there not be an absolute guarantee that some minimum stock of these weapons will be available in an emergency, even if the U.S. might be inclined to limit its own participation? Second, should not the Europeans be in a position to exercise some real measure of influence and control over weapons that are no less essential to their security than...
...Norstad, long a strong supporter of a NATO nuclear-strike force, the answer to both questions is yes. Under his plan, NATO's three nuclear producers-the U.S., Britain and France-would create a stock pile of weapons. "Whatever these countries agree to put in," he said, "should, in an emergency, be available in the common interest, unimpaired by the possibility of a last-minute veto by one or another of the nuclear powers." At the heart of Norstad's plan is the creation of an executive committee whose nucleus would be the Big Three. In this respect...
Majority Rule. How would the committee decide whether to squeeze the nuclear trigger-the key question of all? Said Norstad: "In the interest of prompt decision, the committee, and through it the alliance, should be ruled by the decision of the majority. The majority decision would not bind, at least initially, a nation positively dissenting...