>"His decision was based largely on a guess, he said, but he did have doubts about the accuracy of the computer warnings. First, why just five missiles? A count

>"His decision was based largely on a guess, he said, but he did have doubts about the accuracy of the computer warnings. First, why just five missiles? A country seeking to start a nuclear war would’ve fired more, he told The Post. Second, the ground-based radar installations, which detected missiles, showed no evidence of an attack." It's wonderful that someone like him was in that position, who could look at what was in front of him so that he could make make that ultimate gut decision. Thank God. But this also brings up a fear in me, the next man or woman in his position may not be as rational and calm-headed. Instead of second guessing it, they may respond appropriately to what they believe is the enemy's nuclear launch, fully trusting the technologies in front of them. Or maybe they have too little trust in the technology, and then they don't act at all, and they'll be screwed if there really was an attack. Really makes you think about what kind of person is qualified to be in that position and the training it takes. How does someone get a job in that position? How do they make sure that they aren't going to be someone with a loose screw somewhere? Imagine being the guy who has to choose someone for this position. Imagine being the one who gets chosen. I would shit bricks either way.