Re: [Epic] First Epic 40k battle

From: David Lado <lado_at_...>
Date: Sat, 24 May 1997 11:31:41 -0400 (EDT)

>> 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?"
>>
>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.)

I think the battle cry of "national defense!" is the last rallying cry
of any government pursuing an obviously morally bankrupt policy. You
here it over and over right before some massive infringement of civil
and/or human rights. Most recently in the US, it was used to justify
suspension of civil rights following the Oklahoma bombing. Neither
France or any nuclear power *needs* to upgrade their nuclear weapons
for the exact reasons above.

And as far as the notion that testing nuclear weapons is somehow
"research", I think that is just another smoke-screening and hand-
waving attempt. I seriously doubt this "research" was ever subjucted
to the critical peer review that all other research (including in
France) must first face. Of course, the goverment says "We can't
subject our research to peer review, it would be a threat to (you
guessed it!) _national defense_!" See the beauty in the system? The
goverment does what ever it likes and reserves the authority to
forcibly repress any dissent, at home or abroad.

My feeling is that the french tests (and they keep good company with
the South Africans, North Koreans, and Chineese in this) had nothing
to do with defence or research, and everything to do with military
chest-thumping and international power politics. I.e. They send a
message to friend and foe alike saying "We can do what we want, when
we want, and there's nothing anyone can do to stop us! So watch out!"
The very idea of nuclear weapons as a realistic military threat is
completely uncreadable anyway. Everyone with half a brain knows that
even the French goverment (or any western government) won't nuke
anybody except as a matter of self-presevervation (and the last time
I checked, Australia and New Zealand didn't pose much of a military
threat to the french homeland ;).

David
Received on Sat May 24 1997 - 15:31:41 UTC