I Don't Object To Its Being Called

...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..."

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.

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.

Rationality Will Not Save Us.

I Don't Object To Its Being Called "mcnamara's War." I Think It Is A Very Important War And I Am Pleased To Be Identified With It And Do Whatever I Can To Win It.