US Must Arm Against New Nuclear Powers

In the opinion-page article ``Can Military Strategies `Ban the Bomb'? '' April 29, the author raises a valid point about the possible consequences of enforcing ``counterproliferation,'' or preempting by military means the illegal acquisition and eventual use of threatening nuclear capability by aggressive nations.

But he refuses to acknowledge sufficiently that we live in a dangerous world. Risks to international security are spreading - not least of which is an expansionist North Korea. By the turn of the century at least a dozen new nuclear states with missile delivery systems will be on the global scene. Several of these states are threats to peace. Poignant examples, including Mussolini, Hitler, and their latter-day counterparts, show how foolish it is to let aggressors proceed freely with overtly threatening plans based on stated or otherwise obvious intentions.

A mindless fear of weapons can no longer substitute for asserting the right of nation-states to carry out actions - even of the preemptive kind - in the name of self-defense against dedicated aggressors or would-be aggressors. Albert L. Weeks, Sarasota, Fla.

Your letters are welcome. For publication they must be signed and include your address and telephone number. Only a selection can be published, and none acknowledged. Letters should be addressed to ``Readers Write,'' and can be sent by Internet E-mail (200 word maximum) to OPED@RACHEL.CSPS.COM, by fax to 617-450-2317, or by mail to One Norway St., Boston, MA 02115

We want to hear, did we miss an angle we should have covered? Should we come back to this topic? Or just give us a rating for this story. We want to hear from you.