maybe some of you professional military people can answer this;does it make any sense to send all those troops to the boarder if they are going to let a nuke fly?
and are there any anti-missles in place to intercept?

Quoted Text

---

maybe some of you professional military people can answer this;does it make any sense to send all those troops to the boarder if they are going to let a nuke fly?
and are there any anti-missles in place to intercept?

---

Scott--I do not think anyone has a working "anti-missile-missile" despite the advertisements. That said, I believe that we will see a nuclear exchange after one side makes either a terrible miscalculation or has an accidental lauch. The miscalculation will come if either side launches a missile. The type they have can carry either conventional or nuclear warheads. How does the would be recepient know what in the warhead? This terrifying scenario will not only cause the annihilation of innocent people, but will also cause untold misery for the rest of the world from the fallout ( physical, emotional, economic, and environmental). If they accidentally launch, there is no calling it back. I heard a fellow from India state the other night on the news that both sides have military's that wnat to use the weapons and that no sane voice exist to stop them. I pray he is wrong.
DJ

and how long would it take to recover from the fallout?
how long did the fallout last in japan?how big of an area was infected?

and how long would it take to recover from the fallout?
how long did the fallout last in japan?how big of an area was infected?

But I have to doubt that all of them would fly, unless both sides chose to launch everything at once--suicide. Rather, I think one or two fly.

1 is too many

What I find most rewarding in our discussion is the mind boggling gymnastics we perform because our culture and society can not understand why anyone would ever even think about using nukes. If Rob is correct (and I fear he understates the effects) potentially Pakistan disappears and India reverts to the stone age. And, the rest of the world suffering ranges from an increase of cancer to global warming. There appears to be no voice of sanity within either country saying "whoa! is this really worth it?" What would cause you to openly threaten to go nuclear?
DJ

the only thing we have to compare it to is japan 1945,however i am sure that they are more powerful now than they were then

Quoted Text

---

the only thing we have to compare it to is japan 1945,however i am sure that they are more powerful now than they were then

---

you bet they are. the bombs dropped on Japan were not even 1 megaton.

Amen, Scott. But it takes time, and trust. We barely have that with Russia after 50 years. Lots of other adversaries aren't even close. Adam is right; possibly a dozen would actually go off. But each is probably 100-200 kilotons--Hiroshima was 20. Utter ruin. The choices seem to be mutual terror for long enough that reason eventually prevails (like us with Russia) or actual use of the things because they are viewed as military weapons and not political pawns. EWeventually escaped that, but these two developing nations might not. In part, it might be that the poor conditions there lead some to believe that they don't have much to lose.

Yeah, we've got to get rid of the things. Something tells me that one inocluation sixty years ago was not sufficient to cure the disease, and another oubreak is likely before we finally take the cure....I hope to God I'm wrong on that.
Greg

Nukes are frightful beyond comprehension and not really battlefield weapons at all--they are political ones.

It appears that two Nations, incapable of making an electric toaster, are prepared to hurl nuclear weapons at each other over one of the most desolate areas on the earth. Start this by posing the question: "What can and should the US do about it?"
DJ

Quoted Text

---

It appears that two Nations, incapable of making an electric toaster, are prepared to hurl nuclear weapons at each other over one of the most desolate areas on the earth. Start this by posing the question: "What can and should the US do about it?"
DJ

---

This is an interesting thread, and I wanted to go back to DJ's original question. I feel to understand why India and Pakistan are threatening (and assumed willing) to hurl nuclear weapons at each other - we should first try to understand what would make us want to hurl nuclear weapons at an aggressor, and what has prevented us from doing it thus far.

Is the loss of an aircraft carrier reason enough? How's about the fans and teams playing in a Super Bowl? The loss of the World Trade Center and a portion of the Pentagon wasn't enough - despite our fervor and old MAD doctrine - to send out the Tridents and level an entire country. What would be our "trigger"?

Both sides are intelligent and passionate enough to have built these weapons. They understand the ramifications of using them. They have been able to put them in the back of a cargo truck and drive it across the border(s) for some time now. They haven't done so - and it isn't totally because of foreign intervention, good-intentions, or some first world ideology. In determining what might be our trigger, we could possibly see their trigger.

Only then can we determine a course of action to take to help them through their crisis. What I feel would be valuable is for the two largest, and most powerful, and longest-standing nuclear opponents to join them at the table and talk about "triggers" and what has kept both sides from pushing the button - at that point the ideologies become relevant and meaningful for all concerned.

The solution to any problem can always be found inside one's self. There's a reason why they haven't gone atomic on each other - yet - and I think the solution to this crisis is that same reason. What should, if anything, the US do in this situation? Help find that reason inside of them - and help them to remember it. Not as the World's Policeman - but because we're all neighbors and brothers on this planet.

Just some late thoughts to DJ's original question...

Gunnie