Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

This isn't posturing - we're on the brink of a nuclear war
The Telegraph (U.K.) ^ | 05/31/2002 | Ahmed Rashid

Posted on 05/30/2002 4:25:59 PM PDT by Pokey78

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-152 next last
To: Pokey78
Meanwhile, the trivialisation of nuclear war by both armies and their macho ideologies - jihad and martyrdom on the one side, Hindu fundamentalism on the other - coupled with the elite's refusal to educate their public about the horrors of nuclear conflict, only add to the dangers. Many Pakistanis think a nuclear bomb just makes a bigger bang than an ordinary one.

The US and the USSR had very opposing ideologies, the big difference that kept us from war (and we came close a few times) is the fact that we had oceans between us and both sides understand exactly what a nuclear war would entail - that is not the case here, and that scares the crap out of me. They start tossing nukes, US servicemen in Afghanistan/Pakistan will be harmed, not to mention the fallout and subsequent cleanup (which of course George will ride to the rescue, with our tax dollars).

101 posted on 05/30/2002 7:49:08 PM PDT by texlok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AM2000
All I got to say to that is God Bless The Queen.

LOL

102 posted on 05/30/2002 7:52:37 PM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Bloody Sam Roberts
I am becoming a prescriber to the notion that in the event of defeat by India in a conventional war Pakistan will do two things:

1) Launch its nukes at India in a suicide attack (after all Pakistan has many radical zealots in its military, and as i posted in a previous article there are reports of some commanders being willing to see all of Pakistan destroyed just to get some Inidan cities. And again, suicide bombing is such a 'tender' Islamic trait).

2) Send at least one nuke through the ISI service into the hands of some freedom fighter group.....ooops, i meant terrorist group......, and the reason fro doing this is so that the 'murderous' west that allowed this 'atrocity' of nuclear warfare to be commited against the 'Godly' nation of Pakistan should also suffer.

The above are the Islamic form of Mutually Assured Destruction. Makes one wish for the US-Russia version huh!

103 posted on 05/30/2002 7:52:55 PM PDT by spetznaz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
I don't know that China would want to get involved...The Chinese are patient as hell as well as conservative...I see them as sitting back and seeing where the nukes fall and then deciding to pick up the pieces (or letting the two nations obliterate each other, thereby solving a major headache)....

Of course if the nukes look like they will affect China, they may decide to do something against either nation (remember, nukes do not care what your political or other ideologies are) as an act of self preservation.

The Chinese posture alot, but I am not sure that they want to cause any major ripples.

104 posted on 05/30/2002 7:53:03 PM PDT by texlok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
I'm am somewhat open to your arguement, but I've got to tell you that in the case of India and Pakistan, the death toll would be huge if for no other reason than the building materials at hand. Those major cities would burn burn burn. I'm going to say that I think we'd see some massive numbers if strikes did occur.
105 posted on 05/30/2002 7:55:49 PM PDT by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
bttt
106 posted on 05/30/2002 7:58:27 PM PDT by Don Myers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
Yes we know whom we are dealing with. Unfortunately they have flooded the Bay Area.
107 posted on 05/30/2002 7:59:36 PM PDT by Jamten
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
we're on the brink of a nuclear war

Dude, are we on the eve on destruction? It might be a good time to bring back Barry McGuire! He hasn't had a hit in 37 years and that Christian rock thing he's been doing is getting so old, man.

108 posted on 05/30/2002 8:03:03 PM PDT by Revolting cat!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: abwehr
Chinese are infidels too.

Bless them!
109 posted on 05/30/2002 8:06:11 PM PDT by Vinomori
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
Millions of people equate to massive numbers. But Pakistan has half the population of the entire USA and India about four times as many.

Together, they might lose 20 million, which is huge, but it wouldn't really put a major dent in the overall population. Economically, it would be devastating, although more so to Pakistan.

I'm not trying to downplay the danger or imply that it's acceptable. What I want to do is downplay any suggestion that either side could obliterate the other with nukes. It's not even close to being true.

110 posted on 05/30/2002 8:06:20 PM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
If China launched all 20 of her ICBMs... all 20 would hit.

A true Darwin award entry for some 5 million Chinese.

111 posted on 05/30/2002 8:14:08 PM PDT by JSteff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Bloody Sam Roberts
I would agree, but it would be a terrible price for India to pay, for that victory.
112 posted on 05/30/2002 8:16:13 PM PDT by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: FightThePower!
I asked a question. You over reacted.
113 posted on 05/30/2002 8:16:51 PM PDT by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
What I want to do is downplay any suggestion that either side could obliterate the other with nukes. It's not even close to being true.

,,, it's been a while since I left the comfort of my armchair to do a quick stock take on each side's warheads. What sort of capabilities are at hand?

114 posted on 05/30/2002 8:17:52 PM PDT by shaggy eel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: texlok
I don't disagree with you. I do note that China seems to have some desires on Kashmir. They have control of a portion of it. I doubt they want trouble with India any more than India wants trouble with them. As for Pakistan, I still find it hard to beleive that China would help them gain the bomb. Now that was a long term stroke of insanity.
115 posted on 05/30/2002 8:19:24 PM PDT by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: spetznaz
Makes one wish for the US-Russia version huh!

Actually, no. Against the old Soviet Union we were never sure if we had the upper hand. In this case vs. the Arab world...we do.

If they set off a nuclear weapon on our soil, I am confident that our military would make them all drown in lakes of fire.

I do not wish to contemplate that we wouldn't. Down that road lies madness.

116 posted on 05/30/2002 8:20:23 PM PDT by Bloody Sam Roberts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
What is the value of Kashmir? Are there any natural resources there or are they fighting over worthless land?
117 posted on 05/30/2002 8:23:00 PM PDT by FightThePower!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
The "half their population" comment was over the top. But if these two really went postal, they could exact perhaps upwards of fifty to one hundred million deaths without too much trouble. Now that's a rather large number in anyone's book.
118 posted on 05/30/2002 8:23:08 PM PDT by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: FightThePower!
I should read up on it more. I believe it's mostly related to traditional ties and that sort of thing.
119 posted on 05/30/2002 8:25:02 PM PDT by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: tscislaw, Dog Gone, Pokey78
Be concerned. -- Trans-Pacific Fallout
82 posted on 5/30/02 7:21 PM Pacific by tscislaw

Well, the "good" news is that the nuclear warheads fielded by both India and Pakistan are pretty much all in the 12-kiloton range... i.e., they are "only" Hiroshima-size atomic bombs; if used against cities (which they would be), figure each would cause 300,000 deaths -- 100k "instantly" and 200k from radiation (an estimate from the Japanese experience, which is probably comparable given Japan's high population density).

Ergo, I'm guessing that the total kill-potential of all nuclear warheads on the sub-continent is about 25 million... 7.5 million for Pakistan's arsenal of 25 atomics, and about 18 million for India's arsenal of 60 atomics. Well, we could probably quadruple that "base" number of blast and radiation deaths to account for the resulting chaos and starvation which could likely follow... call it 100 million dead (25 million Indians and 75 million Pakistanis) in the case of a full scale exchange.

Now, that is horrifying, no bones about it. However, the total nominal yield involved is "only" about 1 Megaton (85 atomics at 12kt each), or triple the size of China's 1966 nuke test. So there would be some Trans-Pacific fallout over the US, but something like 0.5% of what your link estimates (given it's assumption of a 200 megaton regional nuclear exchange).

Which means -- in my purely-amateur opinion -- that the take-away from all this is, the kill-potential of these dirty little atomics the Indos and the Paks have pointed at eachother is dreadful (anywhere from 25 to 100 million dead between the two), but the Trans-Pacific fallout danger to the US is... let's call it moderate to serious, not necessarily grave.

The grave danger to the US comes -- again in my opinion -- not from the danger of a straight-up war between India and Pakistan (even a big one), but from the unpredictable "nightmare" scenarios which could develop: if China moves into the game, or if the Pakis "misplace" some of their atomics into terrorist hands, etc...

120 posted on 05/30/2002 8:25:49 PM PDT by OrthodoxPresbyterian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-152 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson