"Mankind Must Put An End To War..."

It's disheartening that such an intelligent man as Dr. Hellman should believe in the theory of nuclear deterrence, that it has ever been demonstrated, or even tested. This belief is even contrary to USAF doctrine on the matter, which holds that not is only there no clear evidence that it has ever worked, but also that the hypothesis is too dangerous to test. The truth tables of deductive logic clearly indicate that the lack of nuclear war cannot be taken as evidence that the existence of nuclear weapons and mutually assured destruction are the ONLY reason there has not yet been a nuclear war. The logical fallacy here is called "affirming the consequent," a fine point of logic that portrays the consequent (lack of nuclear war) as not testing at all the premise and connection between that lack and the existence of nuclear explosive devices. These points were made by Greene in his 1964 book Deadly Logic: The Theory of Nuclear Deterrence in which he points out that not only is there no incontrovertible evidence supporting the hypothesis, but also there is no way to quantify nuclear deterrence in the effort to increase it. It is a belief devoid of supporting evidence, and that is incapable of proof, only disproof. General Scowcroft took this position in various panels on the subject, during the 1980s. That Dr. Hellman should so glibly hold to this belief and look for other more arcane reasons for doing away with nuclear arsenals, is to be expected from someone who teaches the privileged at a school from which many politicos have graduated.