From: John K Clark (jonkc@att.net)
Date: Sun Jan 19 2003 - 13:48:44 MST
"spike66" <spike66@attbi.com>
> We will fire back if fired upon. The shooter might
> as well fire everything he has simultaneously
> because he gets only one chance.
If you're talking about a massive attack by a major world power then yes we
will fire back and destroy the attacker's entire civilization as well as our
own, it's called MAD. If you're talking about an isolated attack, well
despite a massive effort not one mobile scud launcher was destroyed during
the 91 gulf war.
> but the shooter gets only one shot.
> Nuclear submarines put the AD in MAD.
I don't understand what you mean by that, submarines can launch a second
salvo, if you really have a desire to shake up the rubble. The reason one
job will always be more expensive than the other is that the offensive
target is stationary the defensive target is moving at 12,000 mph; the
offensive can be off course by many miles and still cause devastation while
the defense must be accurate within inches, if only 2% of the attacking
missiles work properly that is still more than enough to destroy a
civilization while the defensive must be virtually 100% perfect or it is not
worth doing. Because one is much more expensive than the other the attacker
can always overwhelm the defender, I wish it were otherwise but that's the
way the world is.
> The terrorists use a missile in the fond hope of
> blaming the Russians, so that a TN shootout is
> triggered. Granted it probably wouldn't work,
> for the US has invested in sophisiticated means
> to detect the source of a missile launch.
> What concerns me is that Russia hasn't invested
> in parallel technology, so the terrorists use
> the option of dropping a nuclear missile on
> Moscow. Boris doesn't know for sure who fired
> it, but in brutal desperation, retaliates against
> New York. Europeans are drawn into the unspeakable
> horror, and two hours later most of the world's
> population is either dead or sincerely wishing
> they were.
> The Muslim extremists see their opportunity to
> cleanse the sinful planet. They cheerfully seize
> this opportunity. This nightmare scenario is
> shaping military strategy.
If I change the word "missile" to "Federal Express package" how would
anything change in your very unlikely scenario?
John K Clark jonkc@att.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jan 21 2003 - 17:10:21 MST