No Longer Unthinkable: Should US Ready For ‘Limited’ Nuclear War?

Breaking Defense ^ | May 30, 2013 at 4:57 PM | Sydney J. Freedberg Jr.

[gasport]

I am unable to diagram your 1st sentence.

[Nip]

As an ex-SAC B-52 aircrew member during the early 1970s I STRONGLY object to the concept of a “limited nuclear war”.

You can successfully limit conventional warfare because the weapons’ affects are limited in area and duration. If you are outside the weapon’s immediate affects when it detonates you have an excellent chance of surviving. Look at the survival rate for German civilians during the “thousand plane” bombing raids of World War II.

Nuclear, and other weapons of mass destruction, are a totally different animal. Even for small, “tactical nuclear weapons” you are talking about primary affects extending for miles from “ground zero”. Add to this fallout’s plume as it spreads down wind the primary and secondary affects from a nuclear weapon is massive. Look at the pictures for Hiroshima and Nagasaki and remember those were the affects of nuclear weapons at the lower end of “tactical nuclear weapons” Look at the evacuation area surrounding Chernobyl and you can get an excellent idea of the impact of a non-nuclear “dirty bomb”.

Am I an alarmist about this issue? based on my military, non-combat, exposure to nuclear weapons from the low kilo-ton range through the low mega-ton range I don’t think so. Enough said.

[Olog-hai]

Well, that isn’t stopping other countries from embracing the concept, as you can see. And I agree that it will lead straight to “Har Megiddon”.

[central_va]

Cold War joke: What's the difference between a tactical and strategic nuke weapon?

Answer: A tactical nuke is designed to blow up in West Germany.

[Flintlock]

Air bursts do NOT produce any significant fallout.
To get that, you need the fireball to hit lots of dirt—either a VERY low airburst or ground burst.

[Flick Lives]

If this happens, the Regime will somehow make it Bush's Fault ®

[onedoug]

Sounds like that’s just what barry’s been waiting for.

[American Constitutionalist]

The government tells us that the NSA has the ability to gather information on all humans on earth, and it's not a guess to believe that the CIA has that same ability..... would it be to far fetched to think ? that ? they also have means and ways to tap or hack into the Chinese military assets and systems to make it look like the Chinese are engaging in syber warfare with our systems here in the USA ?

[Secret Agent Man]

obama will false-flag nuke a place in america before he’d ever do it somewhere else in the world.

[JimRed]

Star Wars must be reconstituted. It won’t be, under this regime.

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks Olog-hai.

This doesn’t worry me at all — Zero and his criminal thugocracy setting up a police state, not defending our borders, feeding our armed forces to the guns via foolish ROEs, and stockpiling billions of rounds, that worries me.

Impeach now!

[GOPJ]

Don’t kit yourself - millions of people are starting to ‘catch on’ to Obama.

[ansel12]

I had a nuke clearance also, except mine was for 155 artillery with a range of about 16,000 yards firing a 120 pound round with a 72T yield.

Here is an even smaller tactical nuke, the Davy Crockett was a recoilless rifle on a tripod for firing the M388 atomic round.

"Two distinct calibers of the gun were ultimately built: a smaller 120mm (XM-28/M-28) model with a range of 1.24 miles and a larger 155mm (XM-29/M-29) unit having a range of 2.49 miles. The entire projectile weighed 76 pounds and was 2 feet, 6 inches long with a diameter of 11 inches. The W54 warhead portion encased in the projectile weighed 51 pounds. The weapon had an automatic lethal radiation exposure radius of 10,000 rem out to164 yards (150m) at the blast site and a delayed fatal dose of 600 rem within 150 yards (137.16m) of the blast center - of course this was all dependent on wind direction. The M-388 three-man crew would be exposed with this lethal dose - in effect making them expendable assets. A typical Davy Crockett detachment consisted of three personnel."

[muawiyah]

Way back when the youngest was about 15 he was able to hack into Chinese military systems WITH EASE ~ they imagine their security has improved over time but there are backdoors ..............

[okie01]

Adversaries are less likely to be deterred by America’s nuclear arsenal if they decide we won’t strike back with our big bombs in response to a limited, low-yield nuclear attack on US troops.

Matching a low-yield nuclear weapon with another low-yield nuclear weapon is engaging in a losing game of "escalation".

Instead, adversaries should be aware that the USA will match a low-yield nuclear weapon with a high-yield nuclear weapon.

If we're at war, the object is to win -- not to play for a tie.

Odds are that, in the long run, there will be less damage and fewer casualties by virtue of ending the conflict decisively than in extending the conflict toward stalemate.