I Formed The Hypothesis That Each Of

The Greatest Contribution Vietnam Is Making-right Or Wrong Is Beside The Point-is That It Is Developing An Ability In The United States To Fight A Limited War, To Go To War Without The Necessity Of Arousing The Public Ire.

...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..."

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.

They'll Be No Learning Period With Nuclear Weapons. Make One Mistake And You're Going To Destroy Nations.

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.