  In loving memory of Asher Peres, we discuss a most important and influential
paper written in 1935 by his thesis supervisor and mentor Nathan Rosen,
together with Albert Einstein and Boris Podolsky. In that paper, the trio known
as EPR questioned the completeness of quantum mechanics. The authors argued
that the then-new theory should not be considered final because they believed
it incapable of describing physical reality. The epic battle between Einstein
and Bohr intensified following the latter's response later the same year. Three
decades elapsed before John S. Bell gave a devastating proof that the EPR
argument was fatally flawed. The modest purpose of our paper is to give a
critical analysis of the original EPR paper and point out its logical
shortcomings in a way that could have been done 70 years ago, with no need to
wait for Bell's theorem. We also present an overview of Bohr's response in the
interest of showing how it failed to address the gist of the EPR argument.
