Anyone with any sense would like to see the whole world disarmed of Nuclear Weapons. Of course that isn't going to happen because that particular genie is out of the bottle and all we can do is hope that nobody ever gets to use them again. The bombs we possess now are many more times powerful than the ones dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki and whatever the rights or wrongs of those two events, so the death and devastation would be even more horrific.
So why keep them hanging about? It is all about willy waving. America, Britain, France and all the rest of the Nuclear club (including Israel of all places to have such a devastating weapon) see them as a way to make themselves look big as they deal with other countries around the world. The subtle undertone as discussions with less friendly nations that we could obliterate you so play nice.
As Pakistan and India showed, and North Korea and Iran have taken on board, everything changes once you become a nuclear power. If i was in charge of either N Korea or Iran, i would be going hell for leather to develop the bomb and then parking it right in the middle of the town square.
Of course the biggest threat isn't from a country, its from terrorist cells and what good is nuclear weapons against them? None at all unless you are willing to take out half the country they are in at the same time.
So as much as i support the idea behind CND, it ain't gonna happen so save your subscription money and just hope that the uneasy balance between the haves continues and if the have-nots decide to join the party, well, you can't blame them.
3 comments:
I think you have it right here. The present nuclear powers do just about everything possible to make it costly to not be a member of the club.
Of course, the only real long-term solution to despotic powers getting their hands on nukes is to either pay them some form of tribute, or to threaten to and if necessary carry out obliterating large portions of their country if they ever get their hands on one. Even if the present powers decided not to mess with despotic states, they would still ultimately seek nukes to use against their neighbors or against their own people.
As a military strategy, MAD is always a bluff. The notion of destroying the world is so wholly dumb that I hope anyone who has his hand called will understand that nukes aren't meant to actually be used.
Sun Tzu said that it is best to take your opponent intact; nuking your opponent is the antithesis of taking him intact.
Personally, I would find it ethically unconscionable to use MAD even if I could. I might use nukes at a tactical level to take out other nukes, but it is unthinkable for me to treat killing billions (everyone really) as a viable option.
As I always say, my long term strategy is to see humanity build space ships, terraform other planets, and get off of this flying space death-trap. At least we could have other options.
-Nog
"It is all about willy waving. America, Britain, France and all the rest of the Nuclear club"
Paul, I thought France was williless. My bad
"(including Israel of all places to have such a devastating weapon)"
I wonder if Israels neighbors had a nuke, would they be as "restrained" I don't know
"As I always say, my long term strategy is to see humanity build space ships, terraform other planets, and get off of this flying space death-trap"
I'm with Noah, especially if the legendary all girl planet of Amazon exists. It was in a movie, honest.
Just a thought
You atre confusing lack of willy with lack of soap Cody.
If Israels neighbours had nukes would Israel be a little less gung ho when it comes to killing their citizens?
Post a Comment