Editing 79-14-A4 (section)

=== Transcript ===
When negotiations began on the second Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty with
the Soviet Union, five specific objectives were named as essential to protecting our
national interest. They were: to establish equal nuclear capabilities for the U.S.
and the Soviet Union; secure significant Soviet Arms reductions, especially in those
areas where Soviet offensive forces pose the greatest threat; stabilize the situation
between the two countries so that neither would be tempted to strike first during an
international crisis; reduce the effect of nuclear weapons on world politics; and,
enforce verifiable limitations to which both countries must adhere.

Those are reasonable terms and certainly fair to both the U.S. and the Soviet
Union. Whey then should our Senate waste even five minutes debating the SALT II
agreement? Because it meets none of the five specifics we listed as essential to
protect our national interest.

Point one called for equal nuclear capabilities. Note that word "capabilities".
We didn't say equal numbers. The Soviet missiles are far more powerful than ours and
the agreement permits them to go ahead with some 300 giant missiles, each armed with
a number of separately targeted warheads. We are not permitted to have anything
similar. Oh, we can have the same number of missiles but it's like comparing battleships to rowboats.
Then there is that point about stabilizing the situation so that neither side
would be tempted to settle an argument by launching a nuclear first strike. Secretary
of Defense, Harold Brown, has admitted that virtually all our I.C.B.M.'s, a
substantial number of nuclear missile carrying submarines and many of our B-52
bombers would be vulnerable to a Soviet first strike.

Even though some of our European allies express a hope that SALT II will be
ratified one can't help but wonder if they are sincere or if they are worried about
the Russian Bear sitting right on their borders. Privately they confess to many
misgivings. They had counted on the effectiveness of a new weapon -- the cruise missile
with at least a 1500 kilometer range -- for their own protection. We let the Soviets
bargain that down to a 600-kilometer range which puts most Soviet targets beyond its
reach.

Then there is the supersonic Russian Backfire Bomber minutes away from their
heartlands. WE agreed not to even include those bombers amount the weapons to be
limited by SALT II. We did likewise with an intermediate range nuclear missile,
the Soviet SS20, deployed and able to wreck every capitol city in Europe.

And as for verifiability of whether they are keeping their part of the treaty --
it just doesn't exist. SALT II allows the Soviet Union military advantages which are
denied the U.S. SALT II will not increase the chance for world peace. 

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2">&nbsp;</TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">