From remarks by Sen. Albert A. Gore Jr. (D-Tenn.) in the Congressional Record of May 14:
The president has repeatedly assured the nation that SDI can be pursued without damage to extisting arms control agreements, and without prejudicing chances for agreements in the future. After all, it is only a research program, we are told. And yet, it is a curious and disquieting fact that SDI's most vehement supporters are veteran opponents of arms control.
What is involved here is a conviction on their part that the United States-Soviet struggle will never yield to negotiations, because the Soviet Union's underlying motives will not change. From this perspective, it is not in the U.S. interest to codify strategic nuclear equality, let alone stability, but rather, to concentrate on recapturing our former nuclear dominance. And since the public will not support unlimited new deployments of strategic weapons, there must be another way: SDI.
Not the president's SDI, of course, but the "real" SDI, whose most dedicated supporters mince no words. They want a major increase in U.S. hard-tar-get forces, and they want those forces to be protected by some quick-and-dirty version of SDI . . .
And so, it is not a coincidence that SDI's best friends are the same people who do their best to get rid of SALT 11. Nor is it a surprise that they hail the administration's stunning reinterpretation of the ABM Treaty, which made it almost a charter for SDI. Quite simply, for them, arms control is an obstacle . . .
If we simultaneously give up SALT compliance and announce that we are also going for broke on SDI, then we give the Soviet Union a simple, one-word message: "Build" -- build offensive forces, and build them fast.