About a year has elapsed since I assume my duties as the 10th chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff some of you may wonder when we're all over why why is generals aren't hers as I told the group this morning. I have three basic speeches ones on tank maintenance. Once on helicopter maintenance and the third one's on re-enlistment. I got you this job a little bit by accident. Actually, I had no idea. I was being considered for the job. I'd come back from a trip to South America. And I was asked to see the Secretary of Defense. I went up to see him and I had all my notes from my trip to South America where I met with a number of Latin American leaders. They should come on we got to go see the president. We have an appointment in 5 minutes. I said, all right, so I'm going to ask me about South America. Mr. Weinberger said. The president wants to settle this JCS chairman business and you're you're pretty high on a short list. I said stop I can't go over there. I just built a new house in Minnesota. My wife thinks that we're going to retire I put in my retirement papers. I can't I couldn't even say yes if the president asked me. Weinberger said come on. You'll just have to tell that to the president. Well, we got over there and I explained all this business to this astronomical cash flow problem. I had with that 19 and a half percent construction loan on that house. And the present to had told him of my wife's views and the president said what are you just get some advice and go home and tell your wife because I want you to take this job. So I went immediately to Fort McNair. Explain it to Davison. Can I explain what the president said and I have a tear roll down her cheek? I said Hannah world we get into things like this. She said you lied about your age to get into the National Guard. And God is punishing you. What's interesting job people ask me how I like it and I tell them that I'm too busy to ask myself that questions and beside I might not like the answer. It's a it's a little bit like a like a Minnesota store. I like most Minnesota stories minor all about Scandinavians. I told that group out in Bloomington this morning that I was Walter Hoffman the Lutheran Hour speaker told me last year that it was unseemly to tell ethnic jokes, even though Scandinavian still laugh at themselves and those jokes. They said you can't do that anymore with the position that you have. So I now tell jokes about the Hittites. The Hittites for Yunnan historians were at the height of their civilization at about 7:50 BC and disappeared from the earth for all practical purposes about 1450 BC. They this particular hittite was a fella named Stratton. live down near Shakopee It was involved in a civil suit. Now that Drew is that had grown out of an automobile accident and all of the spend was on the stand and he was being questioned by the by the plaintiff's or by the defendant's lawyer. And he said the lawyer said you see it or is it not true that shortly after the accident? You said you were perfectly. All right. And spend said it's like this. He said I was riding down the road in my pickup truck on this great big flatbed semi-trailer truck came across the median lawyer jumped up and said the in your honor the witness is not answering the question. The judge said the witness will kindly answer the question. So again, the lawyer said his it or is it not true that shortly after the accident? You said you were perfectly alright and spend set again. It's like this. Your auntie said I was driving down the road in my pickup truck when this great big flatbed semi-trailer truck came across the meeting objection your honor the witness is not answering the question. Well, this went on for five times and finally the judge and exasperation said why don't we hear him out to miss shed some light on this so it's been said that it's like this your honor. I was riding down the road in my pickup truck on this great big flatbed semi-trailer truck came across the median and hit me. I had my call Bessie in the back of the truck. I was taking her down the road to follow as well. I was thrown from the cab of the truck Bessie was thrown from the back of the truck. I lost consciousness. When I came to I could see that the highway patrol had already arrived. And I saw this policeman standing over Bessie, and he said this college to Fargo out and he pulled out his pistol and shot her and then he walked over toward me and said and how are you? Well, that's kind of the way I feel in this job of mine occasionally have a day goes by that. I don't read some new account asserted that this country lacks a coherent defense strategy. They were throwing money at the military services that are weapons are too costly and too sophisticated for our citizens to operate. It doesn't surprise me at all that our citizens are sometimes confused about some of the things one reads about the state of the country's defenses in about our national security. And I'd like to share. Some of my observations with you based on 44 years of wearing this uniform as we survey the range of the enormously complex security issues that confront our elected officials are civilian appointed leaders in our uniform leaders. I've got mixed emotions on the one hand. I know that the state of our own military health is better now that I have seen it at any time in the 44 years that I've been in uniform. Many needed programs have been set in motion to correct the shortcomings of recent years. There's accelerated procurement of new equipment on the way. I see some Minnesota National Guardsmen out here in the audience and know that you're getting some of it now. Save, we see much better Readiness as a result of years and years of research that we put into training. We understand much better how to train soldiers Sailors Airmen and Marines. She better leadership as a result of the improved Education and Training for the young leaders that we have. We see greater recognition and respect for our uniform people by the people of this nation. I am bored by my first-hand observations of the army the Navy the Air Force in the Marine Corps, you can be proud of the forces that you have out there both active and and Reserve they are all over the world under the oceans and in the skies doing remarkable things and doing them very well. And by doing so they are reducing the risk of War for this country. And let there be no doubt in your mind on that count. The peacetime strategy of the United States is the prevention of War. Am I at where Nasir the stripes were making to improve our forces contrast with some concerns that I have about our willingness and commitment to provide for our future security. We inherited the liberty and freedom that we enjoy in this world the unprecedented Liberty and freedom that we enjoy in this world of ours from the work of our forefathers who did take care of our security Now it's up to us to provide for the liberty and security of those who will follow us. as I look to the future I can see some primary challenges for us and already dangerous world will become increasingly more salt during the remaining years of this Century the political economic interdependence of our Global family of nation states will continue to grow our principal military threat centers on the unrelenting growth of Soviet military power and despite our standing around and beating our breasts and renting our garment about our own growth and military power. I see no abating in the growth of Soviet military power. The nation must remain United and it's determined termination to provide for the common defense if we're going to secure the blessings of liberty for our posterity. Simsbury tried to observe that this world is a dangerous place, but that reality is often overlooked as we look at what we're trying to do with our budgets to solve the problems that this nation has. One popular Weekly News Magazine noted a few years back that since World War II after World War II there been a hundred and fifty Wars that a sacrifice for 25 million people out conditions haven't improved much since that estimate. If you adopt the Criterion that a war may be defined by a significant loss of life and the employment of regular Armed Forces. There are 20 Wars of one variety or another going on in the world today. The Middle East and Africa and South Asia and right here in our own hemisphere add to that 20 or so other hot spots or conflict is likely either for religious or social or political or economic reasons and you can see why they the Secretary General of the United State of the United Nation said the world is Paralee close to a new international Anarchy. At the same time that International stability is so seriously threatened the economic interdependence of the world has grown astoundingly when I joined the army, the United States was a net exporter of oil about 20,000 barrels a day 43 years later last year. We imported 5 million barrels of oil every day and that was down a million barrels of oil from the two years previously. Copper Bowl statistics as you businessmen. No apply to almost every area to business activity. We're dependent on foreign markets on overseas resources, and I'm Global lines of communication. It's not necessary to look to distant Horizons to seek manifestations of that interdependence or the brutal consequences of armed aggression in the world today. It's a reality that's very close to home here in the United States. The president asked us to turn our eyes Southward to the 4th border here week or so ago to the Caribbean Basin. We see Latin America's importance to the Future Vitality of Western Society steadily growing not only in terms of its strategic resources and expanding industrial base, but because of its strategic importance geographically It is address to Congress last month. The president remind us reminded us that Central America's economic and Military importance to the United States is off and understated. We're well aware of our close ties to our European allies yet half of the NATO supplies. We would need to reinforce Europe would come from our Gulf Coast and go through the Caribbean equally important 44% of all foreign tonnage that comes into this country and 45% of all our crude oil imports passed through the Caribbean the Caribbean Basin is our fourth largest market for exports. We have vital interests in the region and we have to look seriously at the legitimate security concerns of the United States. During the weeks preceding Easter you may have seen photographs in the papers here in Minnesota Navy F-14 jet fighters escorting the Soviet bear bombers off the east coast and down into the Caribbean to their bases in Cuba. The Soviet aircraft service a reminder of the foreign presence here in our hemisphere a present that's growing year-to-year in the decade between 1970 and 1980. There was a 13 fold increase in Soviet Naval activity in the Caribbean. Soviet influence and presence in Cuba has grown dramatically in recent years. The stream of Soviet military assistance to that small nation has been incessant totally more than a billion dollars in security assistance in 1982 alone. The struggling government some people in the Caribbean and Central American region need are strong support not only because of our traditional cultural and economic ties with the region, but because of the Strategic imperative that we face today. That entire region is facing a crisis with social and economic change aggravated by by submersion in almost every country. It's American policy to offer an integrated program of Economic and Military assistance the need to seek social economic and political progress is clear. We probably don't like any of those governments are the world but for some country is El Salvador in particular, there are pressing reasons why they must have military assistance in order to get security in the country so that the other internal reforms can take place. Consider what a freely elected government in El Salvador faces today. The challenge of 7000 armed insurgents trying to shoot their way into the government. I say that that shouldn't happen. Leftist guerrillas and responded in a predictable manner to this country's call for democracy reform and human freedom. Their latest slogan that's being broadcast of the farmers there in El Salvador today is plant and die. Electric power plants and bridges have been destroyed to disrupt the economy. Clearly the leftist were repudiated in last year's election, but despite that they continue their violent intimidation and iron since that time to Iron gorillas have ransacked a third of the country's mayor's office has in attempts to to preclude future elections. I'll tell you very clearly that neither I nor any of the other uniformed military leaders of this country nor any of the civilian leaders in the Department of Defense Advocate introducing us combat forces or trying to implement an American Military solution to the problems of Central America. But Insurgency such as those in El Salvador must be handled by a combination of political and Military and social efforts. What we seek to do is gilgal Salvador the training in the military assistance that they need so that they can solve the problem themselves. So they can establish the security that's needed for economic growth. I frequently read in the newspaper that the American back door American sponsored El Salvador Armed Forces. We have trained if you took the total of the people that we have trained in El Salvador to monster about 10% of the Armed Forces of El Salvador. And since they were the best trained units and I've been subjected to almost continuous combat, it probably amounts to about 5% of the armed forces that are extant today. The regional and World situation today Drive the United States strategy. Our strategy is evolve from the experiences of two world wars and the political realities of the post-war Europe. Harpies time strategy is defensive reflects our global perspective. Let's just say it's built on our economic interdependence. It's centered on our alliances strong alliances in Europe in East Asia. We strengthen those alliances by having troops stationed in those particular areas both to give military strength to the alliances and and to give political Unity to those alliances to let those people know that we and they share a common future and common security problems in the world today. Tell the other elements of our own strategy are strong Naval forces because we are in fact almost an island nation here when separated from our East Asian or European allies, and we need to control the sea in order to be able to communicate with them. We have a central reserve of ready flexible land sea and air forces which are comprised not only of active forces but a strong National Guard and Reserve. We have the necessary strategic Mobility to be able to move those forces. Our forces are considerably larger or smaller than those of the large forces. We would expect to oppose consequently. We need to be able to move faster and we need to have the command-and-control in the best intelligence in the world to make those smaller forces effective and here on the North American continent and then the oceans underneath the world. We've got that other key ingredient of our national strategy and that's our strategic nuclear forces the forces that we need to prevent a nuclear war. Dark strategy calls for the use of American Technology America strong point and we do that because we value human life a lot more than we value things. I constantly hear people say why not buy more cheap weapons because we can buy a lot more of them and give those to our forces and then if you lose them you won't have lost so much you just have more of them, but I don't know about how many of you have children to the Armed Forces. I have some and I don't want them out there with cheap weapons. From a military perspective the most significant and certainly the most dangerous Trend over the last 25 years has been the unrelenting growth of Soviet military power. The Soviets have armed themselves to the teeth and they continue to do so at a rate far in excess of any legitimate defense needs by any measure theirs or ours. The plain fact of the matter is that in the last 10 years Soviet military investment and Hardware alone has exceeded Ours by 500 billion dollars. We're forced to contend with the wrong military power that the Soviets have a choir. I've seen the face of battle enough in my military career to find a difficult to understand that anyone could want a war. Yet we know the Soviets are building the forces. They believe are needed to achieve their War objectives. This Relentless quest for power military superiority by the Soviets achieve new levels during this last year and almost every area of strategic and conventional forces. Certainly, as we were talking at the table the Soviets have a host of problems. They're not 10 ft tall. They do some very dumb things. It's a one-dimensional power there a great power militarily only and they've got some other strategic problems in the world is off and say they're the only country in the world surrounded by hostile communist Neighbors. But certainly their power must be recognized. We never expected outnumber our potential enemies, but now we find that qualitative Edge that we once enjoyed this dissipating at an alarming rate in areas where we once had an advantage. We see the Soviets closing the Gap those Trends simply can't be ignored. Just wait here in the United States go about our business in this world of nation-states. We don't want to be coerced by Soviet power and we don't want our friends and allies course by Soviet power. We don't want a war as we pursue our political and cultural and economic social objectives in this world those that we the people choose those are our objectives and we want to pursue them, but we don't want to be paralyzed by the fear of War as we go about pursuing those objectives. nuclear deterrence in the role of our strategic nuclear forces of commanded a great deal of a public attention recently and rightfully, so The issues are debated exhaustively on moral political and Military grounds. And I think it's important for all the citizens to understand the complex issues. Change the prevention of War and the preservation of our life our way of life or an extra kabli linked to the deterrence of War. I know that secretary Weinberger discussed his views on these issues with you last fall and I'd like to go over some rap some new points. We call this strategy deterrence. And that means simply that our potential enemies must realize that the losses they all suffer from our retaliation won't be worth the advantage. He might gain by attacking he must realize that if he attacks he cannot achieve his wartime objectives. Now we built. The first real strategic strategic nuclear capability in this world. We did in the 50s Not in response to Soviet nuclear power button response to Soviet conventional power. We did it because we are allies were unwilling or unable to match the vast conventional forces that the Soviets maintained on the borders of Western Europe and elsewhere in the world. Now that's conventional threat that the Soviets posed at that time is still there. It's larger now considerably than it was at that time and it's much more modern today than it was that. In addition the Soviets have amassed a striking nuclear capability. We can't wish that threat away. It simply won't go away with which is our hopes for Goodwill. The u.s. Is striving for deep reductions in nuclear arsenals. But with nuclear proliferation in the world a sad reality, I think it's unlikely that the nuclear Genie will be stuff back into the bottle. Some would argue that conventional forces alone should suffice to deter man's regrettable tendency to destroy one another and all those things that we hold dear and I would say to you that history history tells us otherwise Liddell Hart in his Landmark history of World War II compared to the opposing forces and revealed some things that some of us may have forgotten He wrote the 1939. It was doubtful. Germany could long withstand the pressure of prolonged conflict given that country shortage of War products and resources. Hard argues that Germany's early spectacular victories did not result from an overwhelming superiority of arms and weapons. Attack the German Army and Navy were not prepared for war in 1939. And we're not Superior by many of the indexes. We now hold when compared with the forces of Great Britain and France. What they did possess, of course with some new ideas about Warfare in an idiot logical commitment that brought them to the brink of victory. Did Nazi Germany was not deterred by the combined superiority and conventional forces arrayed against her? On the other hand, there's no denying. That was the possession of strong nuclear and general-purpose forces in the hands of a coalition to free and democratic governments. The continent of Europe is enjoy one of its longest periods of uninterrupted. Peace. In an article of great Insight that was published in the in the National Review your on the 1st of April at the article was entitled Clarity in the nuclear age written by Michael Novak and if you haven't read it, I strongly urge that you read it. Novak said deterrence is sometimes judge against ideals and not against recent history and there are certainly moral arguments and specific actions to support that point. In the past six years that the Soviets have deployed among the most accurate operational missiles in the world and they put those missiles in the world's hardest missile silos. In 1982 Alone part of that modernization of their strategic nuclear missile Force the deployed over 1,200 modern so-called Hard Target killing Warheads more than we intend to deploy in our entire intercontinental ballistic missile force modernization, and they did the same thing in 1981, and they will probably do the same thing again in 1983. Soviet Union has deployed and tested the number of new icbms and new and improved submarine launched ballistic missiles Soviets have had cruise missiles on their submarine since the early 60s. I wish I could have to recognize that the accelerating Soviet modernization in her own lack of major improvements in the past two decades is left as well behind in some very important measures of strategic military capability. We as a nation simply must deal with that reality of Soviet military power and the destabilizing consequences of the Soviet actions. Salvador de madariaga read Spanish a historian and philosopher who worked on the United Nations disarmament console or not the United Nations, but the League of Nations disarmament console for many years. I said that Nations don't distrust each other because they're armed their arm because they discussed each other and that's a very important point for us to remember. We must be clear to the Soviets if deterrence is to work. I must be clear that we can retaliate to a Soviet nuclear attack by destroying the Soviet military forces in such a way that guarantees their War aims will not be achieved. Someone said they heard George Brown out here some years ago. My predecessor twice removed and George said that went. Oh God cop went in to see Bryson Ave. And Russian have said now is now the time he wanted to go work off safe to say not yet. Well, that's exactly what I want to say to mr. On drop-off to not yet. To do this. We must simply modernize our strategic nuclear forces, and she said she'll for deterrence she sent for peace and it's essential for any hope of strategic nuclear arms reductions. If Mr. And drop-off can look off to this country and western Europe. NCS dismantling our own modernization program through the Western political process. There's no need for him to go to the negotiating table to reduce nuclear arms. Many loyal and intelligent Americans have advocated to so-called nuclear freeze in the hope of reducing reducing the risk of nuclear war. There's a very strong surface appeal for such proposals. But the sad fact of the matter is that a freeze is more likely to increase and not decrease the chances of War because it'll undermine the very Foundation of deterrence the fries that would prevent this country from correcting the deficiencies that I described Woodloch in Soviet advantages that exist today. It would not guarantee that the Soviets wouldn't continue to build on those advantages by either clandestine programs or by technological improvements which are difficult to verify it would not prevent Soviet improvements in passive and active defensive measures, which could further degrade our own determine posture. It could well nullify our determination to reach meaningful arms reductions during the negotiations that are going on. The potential destructive power of nuclear weapons is awesome. But is any weapon in immoral in and of itself? I believe we must consider the ends that are to be achieved by their possession mindful that there'll be no winner in a nuclear war we have to do all we can to prevent one together with our European allies. We pledge that no weapons conventional or nuclear will ever be used in Europe except in response to an attack. The greater moral good that we seek to achieve through deterrence must take into account the actions of our adversaries and the conditions that we face in the world today. Peace must be tended must be nurtured must also be protected. To do otherwise would be morally incorrect. Gmod react at the same time on that same quotation said that the problem with the disarmament was that that it has looked at the problem of War upside down and at the wrong end that is to say that you have to come to some fundamental agreements between the contending Nations before you can expect disarmament. I think you said that it would be like asking people to go undressed in the winter time. The natural an understandable longing for peace and domestic Prosperity sometimes undermines our ability to prepare for the war we seek to prevent but George Washington said there is nothing so likely to produce pieces to be well prepared to meet an enemy. In the days just before World War II many people in England and France in the United States considered defense Appropriations, too high and adequate defense too difficult to maintain they weren't they weren't disloyal but they were sure dead wrong. I hope we're not judge. So by history. Thank you very much. Nice to be with you. Start a far position with respect to the Soviet Union is such a negative one that I freeze would be dangerous. Why is it within the last year or two? It was reported the least. Remember the Joint Chiefs of Staff had indicated who would not choose voluntarily the trade the power at his disposal for the power after the spelling of his Soviet counterpart. Well, I think it's that wasn't a question that was used in one context and has been used to illustrate a different point. I answered that same question at my confirmation hearings. I said, I wouldn't trade my job for a car coughs under any circumstances. We don't we don't want the large Soviet military machine. We don't want all those Russian soldiers running around this country. However, I also said that there are things in the Soviet Arsenal that I would trade immediately as a matter of fact, if you're going to have a nuclear freeze, I would trade our strategic nuclear forces for there's hands down right now today, but I would certainly trade their intercontinental ballistic missiles for hours. I would trade the numbers of Tanks. I'm not sure that I'd want all those tanks, but I would certainly take about thirty 40% of theirs and add to our so but if you want now do I want to be a Russian new? It's just that's that answer to that question is the wrong way to illuminate the argument about do we or do we not need to modernize our own forces? But I hope I made that clear I'd I don't I don't want to be part of the Soviet Union and I don't think anybody else in here does. Channel That's who I'd like to hear about tank maintenance and but only asked about re-enlistment. How in your view is the old volunteer army working and do you see any pressure is building for the conscription or dry? Babe, I think we've learned some things in the 10 years. We've had a volunteer Force this time. We've alternated the through the years of the 208 or whatever years years of History. It is in this country, but we have learned some very important lessons in the past 10 years that we as citizens should not forget as we march on into the ladder quarter of the century in the in the next century and that and the first lesson is that the fundamental building block for armed forces for a nation of the people that are in it. And it is the most one of the most important duties that the leadership the political leadership in this country has been one of the most important duties that we as citizens have to see to it that the armed forces are people with good capable Americans. If you can do that with volunteers, if you're if you're willing to do pay the right price, you can do it with the drafted people. If you make that system work, we have shown that we can do it at with volunteers last year all four services and the National Guard and Reserve met their recruiting objectives and they all did it with higher-quality Young Americans and we've had come into the Armed Forces at any time in history 85% of the recruits wear high school graduates about 86% of the recruits wear at average or above-average in mental categories. The difference is astounding and it shouldn't be any of it. It shouldn't be any surprise to you. Businessman. If you hire people who learn faster the attrition rate in the training is down. It doesn't cost you as much to train them when they get out and start maintaining complicated equipment the cost of maintaining the equipment goes down because they're smarter. They can read the manuals and follow the instructions and do the right thing the first time instead of the second or third time. And the matter of fact is when you get down to it not even dummies want to serve with dummies. Good people attract good people and you can save you from everyone of you who's in business recognize the reality of that statement. Now if we're going to have volunteer forces, we've got to recognize that it calls for a recognition that that military service is a bit different. You don't you don't work for the Army Navy Air Force or Marine Corps you serve in it? And that that difference has to be recognized by those who provide the emoluments the way of life and the support to those people in their families. We've got the right at this minute. We've got infantryman patrolling in the demilitarized zone in Korea and are probably a couple hundred yards away from North Korean infantryman who are patrolling there and just as soon shoot him is not but those soldiers are out there doing that very willingly. We've got some marines that have been out under the water sounds for 2 or 3 months on end Sailors are at the ready doing that willingly. We've got guys that are flying single-seat fighter airplanes across the Atlantic being refueled on the way. You got to have Iron Pants alone to be able to to take that trip. We have people who are who are working not 40, but 80 and more hours a week. We've got people down in the sign. I got a peacekeeping mission down there. That's so far from North where that is surrounded by nothing. How many of you ever been to the Sinai? I went down there to visit that Battalion here and it was the epitome of a good American volunteer outfit just absolutely top-notch. I couldn't couldn't believe my eyes to see these guys out there on these wrong-way Squad Outpost with the squad leader in the control everybody doing a full day's work. They discipline was absolutely superb. I ate dinner with an infantry company One Night in the world you fellas do in your spare time. Hello, I'm said well last weekend. He said the 62 of us went off and climb Mount Sinai just for the fun of it. Had a big black soldier across the table from you said and I learned something to sir. And I said, what did you learn? He said I learned that old man. Moses was in good shape. I just want to tell you you got a you got a great Army Navy Air Force and Marine Corps out there today and you can be proud of them. I heard all that jazz about to read the newspapers about the Marines in Lebanon were high on drugs or something. I've been into Beirut to several times to visit those troops. The last time that that a battalion came out of there they gave him a surprise urinalysis for for drugs. and the positive count in those troops was something around one-tenth of 1% users now compare that to the rest of the population as a whole and I think you've got something to be proud of Next question on re-enlistment who wants to sign up? The general made a reference in your speech more than one occasion to Soviet Global objectives, and I'm wondering if you could comment on what you see are the immediate threats and the also the long-range Soviet ejectives. I think they the objective the Soviets are spending more time than on almost any other now is to separate the United States from our Western allies. You see that Janiya in the propaganda campaign. You see it very much tied to the issue of nuclear forces in Europe. And that's not only a short-term goal. That's a long-term goal. I think it's been the preps their number one foreign policy objective for the last 30 years. And certainly we see them pursuing that at Great length. The other goals of the Soviet Union are to gain influence in in the third world and particularly gain influence in those parts of the third world that will put the United States in the Western Alliance is at a disadvantage. We see that being pursued in Africa that's part of the exercise and Central America and the Caribbean. have goals that there that we need to ascertain the counter could you comment on the high Frontier defense program and tell us if this is going to become a reality in the near future? Well High Frontier is one sort of an idea that one particular group has had four strategic strategic ballistic missiles. We The Joint Chiefs recommended to the president that this last February then that in the future that he set a course for the United States which would use the fruits of our technology along with arms control in the threat of retaliation due to provide some physical defense against ballistic missiles. We pointed out to him that that today's technology doesn't give a great deal of Hope being able to do that immediately. But we did point out that there are a lot of things on the horizon that need to be brought up out of the basement of the research and development community and raised up to to the sites of the of the senior decision-makers in this country so that we are not on this constant track of constant of the threat of relying solely on the thread Navigation for our security and we believe that that can be done. Now. I constantly reading the papers about the president system while the president doesn't have any system there is system at the present time, but there are all sorts of areas. Call technological promise that check that shouldn't can be and will be examined. And I would hope that by sometime early in the next Century. If we haven't started out our difficulties with the Soviet Union that we might well be able to provide some physical defense against ballistic missiles and make those very dangerous and destabilizing weapons or less useful than they are today. And that's make the world a place feel safer place. I'm General nobody ever mentions the possibility of an American First Strike on the Russians. Is that something you ever discussed discussed it a great deal? But we do not have any plans for an American First Strike on the Soviet Union. And I think mr. And drop-off knows that. Had I hear it mentioned I had fact I read an article. I guess it was in this morning's Minneapolis paper about the danger of us perhaps acquiring First Strike weapons a first strike is no good. Unless you're absolutely going to win with it. You need a totally decapitating First Strike has the has the nuclear theory is call it and buy a thousand MX Warheads on a hundred missiles is not going to provide the United States with a decapitating first-strike capability. It will in fact provide us with the capability with which the Soviets must must reckon and it will add to the deterrence at War but Mr. I drop off those very clearly that we will not have bought a system that will permit us to attack him first. General there was an article in the New York Times last week. That's spoke to what is the u.s. Definition of deterrence and I will try to recall it as best. I can or articulated as best I can and that is that under current policy. We would have Zorb a full strike by the Soviets before we would launch our retaliatory missiles and that we are now giving some consideration to a change in that policy that would launch our missiles at the first sign that there had been a launch on the Soviet side. Is that a position of the Joint Chiefs? And could you elaborate on that a little bit for us? It is the policy of the United States that we will not. Launch on warning or lunch under attack, but it is also our policy that we will Reserve that right if we see fit and it is it is a reality with which the Soviet Union must deal. It is part of the they have the guilty of deterrence. I missed her and drop off. We're not going to tell him whether those missiles are going to be our own missiles will be in the silos when his Warheads arrived or not. I don't think we should tell him. But I would say to you also that is our policy not to accept as as a firm policy launch on warning or launch under attack. Certainly, the president the United States if that if if all this were doing to prevent for the president United States has got to be very confident that he's at War before he goes on with the with any sort of a strategic Nuclear Strike of his own.