Re: [Epic] First Epic 40k battle

From: E. Sund <esund_at_...>
Date: Sat, 24 May 1997 00:31:40 -0700 (PDT)

On Sat, 24 May 1997, Sutherland wrote:

>
> >
> >Err...could someone explain to me how these ridiculous tests are supposed
> >to be so critical for your "defense"? If you've got the bomb, why do you
> >need to keep testing? After the few 20 or so megatons aren't you pretty
> >much squared away for MAD (at least European-theater mini-MAD)? And don't
> >you think the continents a bit too small to be flinging tactical nukes
> >about? God help us (and I am not religious), it's more froggie trouble.
> >
> >E. Sund
> >
>
> Nuclear wpns are still pretty theoretical devices. They know how they work
> but not really why. When they first tested the A bomb there was some
> speculation on if the explosion would ignite the entire atmosphere and
> destroy the whole earth. And most countries with nukes want to cram as many
> warheads as they can into one missile as possible and the way they do that
> is to make them smaller and/or more powerfull. It could also be a threat
> type thing. "Hey look buddy. we just blew up part of the Pacific. Dont piss
> us off allright?"
>
> That Unknowing Chuk Guy
>
>

Well, yes. You test your nukes to build bigger/better ones. That part I
understand. But do nuclear arms really need to be 200 megatons rather
than 75 to serve their purpose? You've got a really unpleasant item
either way. And who really cares exactly how they work? They already work
too damn well! It isn't really reasonable to say "uh-oh, our national
defense is at stake- they can disintegrate us 45 times and we can only do
it to them 30 times...quick! let's go test some bombs in the Pacific
Ocean!" Or at least it isn't in my mind.

Of course, this is ignoring the other issues like respect for other
nations' sovereignty and the fact that attacking a shipful of
environmentalists is sick and pathetic (it doesn't matter if they're a bit
fringe, to describe the event as "silly" is a grotesque exaggeration.)

Erik Sund

PS - I mean no personal offense to our French friend. But I do suggest
that he reconsider his evaluation of Chirac's decisions.
Received on Sat May 24 1997 - 07:31:40 UTC