Re: [Epic] First Epic 40k battle

From: Chris Weigt <Christopher.Weigt_at_...>
Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 09:44:21 +1000 (EST)

On Sat, 24 May 1997, Richard Dewsbery wrote:

> > 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.
> >
> I think it works like this - possessing enough megatons to destroy the
> world several time over = overkill.
> Possessing more overkill than the enemy = strategic advantage.
> Or something like that. The acronym for this mutually assured
> destruction is obvious.
> Richard
I got my .sig from a book on Oz's nuclear policies/contingency plans etc
in the 80's. Interesting reading. Did you know that in the event of global
nuclear war and the resulting nuclear winter, Oz will have the biggest
supply of vitamin B? Vegemite - horrible stuff, but it does have its uses
(For those of you who don't know what it is, its a vile, odious sandwich
spread derived from yeast)

Overkill: the ability to kill an entire country's population more than once.
Strategic Superiority: possessing more overkill than your enemy.
Email: sci-clw1_at_...
Received on Thu Jan 01 1970 - 00:00:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Oct 22 2019 - 13:09:30 UTC