Post by Gogarty
The two atomic bombs were pigmies. The MIRVed bombs in today's arsenals are a
whole other thing.
The MIRV bombs in today's arsenal are a magnitude smaller than the
super H-bombs that were tested during the megaton contests of the
1950s. One of those chumpies, of which I think we have some 100 listed
in the inventory but not presently "commissioned", could irradiate an
area from New York to Boston.
Post by Gogarty
The next one won't and
NK has the delivery systems to hold a big chunk of Asia hostage. For that
matter, so do India and Pakistan and Israel, not to mention Russia, former
bits of the USSR and our presumably restrained friends France and the UK. The
world has not survived unrestrained nuclear exchanges of any kind. Let's hope
it never has to.
Well, see, that's what I'm saying. EVERYONE is going to get the bomb,
and all the conflicts are on their side of the world. Since we both
agree that we can't take over the world and stop proliferation (oh, if
only Iraq had worked), the best we can accept is a dodgy but hope we
get lucky Star Wars in case someone takes a shot at us, and, an almost
certain life of radioactive exposure because of some nuclear conflict
Post by Gogarty
Yeah, right. Like the Patriot missile in the first Gulf War. After all the
hype they turned out to be, apparently, zero percent effective under
battlefield conditions and pretty good at shotting down friendlies in the 2nd
war. In any case, when discussing nukes "theater level" is an oxymoron.
Actually no, theater level is not an oxymoron. A 100kt yield tactical
nuke is about where third world proliferation stands. It's about 5x
Hiroshima, but, that works out only be about twice the blast radius - a
fairly effective area weapon but not a global thing.
And, when I say theater level, I mean, the Navy has successfully shot
down ICBMs launched in boost phase with the Aegis system, the Israeli
Arrow System has shot down SCUDS, and, it works.
Finally, in the case of PATRIOT in GW1, the missiles -did hit the
incoming target-. Just, they did it when the missile being engaged was
already over its own target area, so the warhead just fell like it was
already doing. The appeal of boost phase intercept is that you get the
nuke to fall back on the guy that launched it, sort of a sweet little
People have also developed systems that can shoot down incoming rocket
propelled grenades. It's rumoured that these will be deployed to Iraq
if the war lasts long enough for them to be built in numbers.
So, for defense against missiles, the elements of success are there,
we just need to keep plugging away at it - more powerful lasers, faster
computers, higher resolution radars, better telescopes...all of which
is doable. Yes, Star Wars does demand that we upgrade our knowledge of
physics across the board, but it certainly can be done.
Post by Gogarty
Then we don't invade Aruba. Simple. You don't think we would have invaded Iraq
if we really believed thay had WMDs? No way.
Very true. But for me, I never really cared if there were WMD in Iraq.
I was so pissed off after 9/11, that, I saw, and most pro-war people
saw 9/11 as the opportunity to finally clean house in the middle east -
just go in there, shoot up the joint, maybe a nuke a few cities and get
these people to chill out. Saddam could have been accused of trying to
summon demons, and I would have been on the usenet arguing that he had,
in fact, been trying to summon demons. I chalked all that up to the
dumb propaganda that goes with wars like Saddam killing babies in GW1,
Noreiga personally selling cocaine to children, death camps in the
Balkans, North Korean plans to invade Boston, Vietnamese plans to
subjugate San Fransisco, Japanese plans to invade L.A. or German plans
to invade New York.
NONE OF WHICH WERE TRUE.
Fact is, there has not been a war waged by any administration EVER in
the history of the United States whose war aims were true. Even our
own Revolution had its share of lies - just at look at how much Sam
Adams trumped up the so-called Boston Massacre. The War of 1812 was a
total fraud, and even the civil war was sold as a "keep the union
together" when in reality it was to free the slaves. I see the Left
wing complaining about Bush lying, I just shake my head and wonder
where all of this morality is coming from now. You guys have lied your
rears off on all your wars too.
Lying to start a war is more American than apple pie.
Bin Laden mouthed off, we ignored him. Booom. Saddam mouthed off, and
we had been ignoring him. With the whole country ready to genocidally
wipe out the entire islamic world, taking out Saddam was just a decent
house keeping compromise. The war was never about the weapons, it was
about the man, and, had Iraq not fallen into civil war, I would have
cheered as Bush moved into to dispatch Assad in Syria, and why not take
out the mullahs in Iran. Just get rid of all of these jerks in one
shot, put in the American way, and move on.
That's how you build empires. But, Bush f--- it up.