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

To: B-Chan
I'd like to avoid the "thermonuclear" part if at all possible.

Ditto. But the best defense is a superior, and survivable, counter threat. One that really Deters...

41 posted on 10/17/2007 11:40:56 AM PDT by Paul Ross (Ronald Reagan-1987:"We are always willing to be trade partners but never trade patsies.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]


To: Paul Ross
the best defense is a superior, and survivable, counter threat. One that really Deters

I agree.

I'm not of the camp that believes that nuclear war will mean the end of the world. This is not 1963, and the odds of an all-out, city-busting nuclear attack on the U.S. by any nation are small. (Those that could do it won't; those that would do it can't.) The main threat today is isolated nuclear attacks by terrorists. While losing a city would be a major disaster, I'm confident that life would go on as usual outside of the immediately-affected area.

That being said, I do think that any use of nuclear weapons — here, there, or anywhere — will throw the markets and the economies of the world into chaos, and kick off a major economic disaster, maybe even a global depression. For that reason alone we must prevent any other country from acquiring nuclear weapons, and must not use them ourselves except as a last-resort guarantee of national survival.

61 posted on 10/17/2007 12:04:48 PM PDT by B-Chan (Catholic. Monarchist. Texan. Any questions?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies ]

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