Argues that the nuclear threat is fundamentally a textual problem, a problem created and perpetuated by argumentative and rhetorical practices. Maintains that argument critics need to formulate a politically powerful "nuclear criticism" in order to subvert and dismantle argument formations which might motivate nations to engage in…

Examines the way competing interpretations of evidence form the basis for arguments over appropriate defense postures. Indicates that it is only as participants in a policy dispute move to develop validity standards appropriate to the particular dispute that resolution becomes possible. (MS)

Traces the theoretical significance of using names as titles for situations, and applies this analysis to the United States' intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) programs. Argues that the names given to ICBMs preserve their utility as weapons by linking them to the myths of the nineteenth-century western frontier. (MM)

Given a choice of one argument, most Cross Examination Debate Association (CEDA) competitors would choose the nuclear war scenario, which attempts to capitalize on apocalyptism. A three-stage methodology can be applied to apocalyptic appeals. First is an application of the concept of universal audience, composed of all reasonable and competent…

Argues that the use of historical events as rhetorical artifacts has sustained cold war assumptions and attitudes; that rhetorical events provide composites for rhetorical histories which become the basis for argumentative appeals; and that these rhetorical histories continue to permeate American diplomacy in general and arms negotiations in…