Show simple item record

Response to Uzi Rubin’s “Comments on the UCS Report on Countermeasures”

dc.contributor.authorFetter, Steve
dc.contributor.authorDietz, Bob
dc.contributor.authorGarwin, Richard L.
dc.contributor.authorGottfried, Kurt
dc.contributor.authorGronlund, Lisbeth
dc.contributor.authorLewis, George N.
dc.contributor.authorPostol, Theodore A.
dc.contributor.authorSessler, Andrew M.
dc.contributor.authorWright, David C.
dc.identifier.citationBob Dietz, Steve Fetter, Richard L. Garwin, Kurt Gottfried, Lisbeth Gronlund, George N. Lewis, Theodore A. Postol, Andrew M. Sessler, and David C. Wright, Response to Uzi Rubin’s “Comments on the UCS Report on Countermeasures."en
dc.description.abstractWe recently received—via a third party—a critique of our report, Countermeasures. The critique, written by Uzi Rubin and titled “Comments on the UCS Report on Countermeasures,” is dated 18 July 2000. Rubin states that his study was “considerably less exhaustive” than the countermeasures report and was done by “a small team of experienced missile engineers.” Rubin’s critique has not been published, but instead has been distributed informally in the United States. Here we respond to Rubin’s points in the order that he makes them. As we will make clear, Rubin’s criticisms are either technically invalid or based on incorrect characterizations of the assumptions that underlay our work.en
dc.format.extent75660 bytes
dc.publisherUnions of Concerned Scientistsen
dc.subjectmissile defenseen
dc.titleResponse to Uzi Rubin’s “Comments on the UCS Report on Countermeasures”en
dc.relation.isAvailableAtSchool of Public Policyen_us
dc.relation.isAvailableAtPublic Policyen_us
dc.relation.isAvailableAtDigital Repository at the University of Marylanden_us
dc.relation.isAvailableAtUniversity of Maryland (College Park, Md.)en_us

Files in this item


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record