Rethinking Armageddon: The case for new low-yield nukes.

The Wall Street Journal Opinion Journal ^ | April 18, 2004 | Editorial

[quidnunc]

No one likes to consider the possibility of nuclear war. But somebody's got to do it, and that sober duty fell recently to a special task force of the Defense Science Board, which has just recommended useful changes to the U.S. strategic arsenal to fit our post-September 11 world.

First we should note what the task force does not want to change — the high threshold for use of nuclear weapons. "It is, and will likely remain, American policy to keep the nuclear threshold high and to pursue non-nuclear attack options whenever possible. Nothing in our assessment or recommendations seeks to change that goal," the panel writes. "Nevertheless, in extreme circumstances, the president may have no choice but to turn to nuclear options."

The scenarios the task force envisions aren't, regrettably, all that extreme. High on the list would be eliminating an enemy's weapons of mass destruction before it has a chance to use them on us. (Think rogue states and assorted terrorist groups.) Or removing an adversary's regime while saving a country (North Korea). Or ending a WMD war quickly (India-Pakistan).

The task force argues that we need a better nuclear doctrine than the mutually assured destruction, or MAD, of the Cold War. Current plans to refurbish the nation's stockpile of nuclear weapons from the 1970s and '80s "will not meet the country's future needs," the report says. Large, high-fallout nuclear weapons designed to obliterate cities won't deter terrorists who might doubt that a President would use them in response to an attack.

-snip-

[txzman]

I hope they have considered the 'Purity of Essence' problem and what to do about the 'mine shaft gap'. Otherwise, we are all doomed...

[expatguy]

A solution to the Palestinian problem.

[Betaille]

Can we test the first one on GAZA?

[Dark Glasses and Corncob Pipe]

Would a Democrat know what to do with them?

[RonHolzwarth]

One line from the article is:

"Large, high-fallout nuclear weapons designed to obliterate cities won't deter terrorists who might doubt that a President would use them in response to an attack."

Let's play a little game: Rearrange The Words.

Who won't doubt that terrorists would use large, high-fallout nuclear weapons designed to obliterate cities? To deter them, a President might attack in response.

I WIN, I WIN, I WIN!

The only word I didn't use is : ---> an

[fso301]

Would a Democrat know what to do with them

Look what they did to Waco.

[COEXERJ145]

We already have plenty of low yield nuclear weapons that could be put to use to destroy a terrorist camp containing WMD's. The B-61 series, some of which are recycled cruise missile and Pershing II warheads, can yield a little as .3 kilotons or up to 340 kilotons. Deliverable by almost any aircraft in the U.S. inventory, it would be the perfect weapon for destroying a soft target with minimal fallout over long distances. The B-61 Mod-11, with a yield of >10-340 kilotons, is a ground penetrating weapon that is designed to destroy deeply buried hardened targets. However, it only goes 10-20 feet deep before detonation.

What is needed is a new weapon that will bury itself so deep that it contains almost all the fallout. This would require a weapon to burrow hundreds, if not thousands, of feet underground. We cancelled all nuclear weapon design programs in 1991 and haven't conducted a nuclear test since the Divider test in Sept. 1992. It is time to put the Nevada Test Site back to use and resume nuclear weapon construction and testing.

[fire_eye]

Large, high-fallout nuclear weapons designed to obliterate cities won't deter terrorists who might doubt that a President would use them in response to an attack.

I'm not following this... In such case, what is it that they are proposing to develop, which they think *would* deter a terrorist because the terrorist *would not* doubt that a President would use them?

[Centurion2000]

Use gamma ray weapons ... there is an article in FR about using isotopes to generate LARGE bursts of radiation to kill every living thing within a certain radius.

[Fledermaus]

Does any of this matter? No. We aren't prepared to do anything to defend ourselves. The borders are still wide open and Bush isn't going to do ANYTHING to change that and neither will any pinhead politician.

Wake up people! We are screwed and being sold down the river to make jerks in government rich. Bush, Kerry, GOP, Dems...it makes no difference.

And if you think it does, then you are a fool. The GOP now spends like Democrats because they control the purse strings. Gotta have that $100K for a museum of dog crap in Ohio!!!

[Glenn]

'Purity of Essence' problem and what to do about the 'mine shaft gap'.

How about a remedial lesson in what that means? I'm completely lost.

[earonthief]

Bring back the Neutron Bomb

[archy]

It is time to put the Nevada Test Site back to use and resume nuclear weapon construction and testing.

Nah. We've learned that we must be more caring for the enviornment since the last series of Nevada nucdets, and we simply cant take the chance that the last of a species of snail or rat might have since taken up residence in the Nevada blast site.

Let's use the new Fallujah test site instead, where it's certain that there are no creatures worth saving.

[archy]

How about a remedial lesson in what that means? I'm completely lost.

The following reference is presumably lost on you. See *here*, and when you get a chance, rent the video film described, and be prepared to both laugh and do a little thoughtful reflection afterward. And you'll also have a list of useful items for your next vacation to Las Vegas.

[Dark Glasses and Corncob Pipe]

"What is needed is a new weapon that will bury itself so deep that it contains almost all the fallout. This would require a weapon to burrow hundreds, if not thousands, of feet underground."

That means we will need to contract Halliburton into the loop!

[Dave Elias]

I wonder how many will dismiss it as lefty clap-trap?

[archy]

I wonder how many will dismiss it as lefty clap-trap?

Oh, hey- that was the genius of Stanley Kubrick, packaging his films in popular entertainment that the lefties just ate up, swallowing whole, only to find more layers of flavours within and little logic bomb loops for them to have come back to haunt them again and again.

Major Kong, your ride is here.

[txzman]

LOl - sorry. Purity of Essence and Mine Shaft Gap are two funny themes going through the movie Dr. Strangelove, with Peter Sellars and George C Scott.

In Purity of Essence - a mad General believes the commies are poisoning our water supply and sends B52's to bomb Russia. He uses 'POE' as the code prefix.

Mine shaft gap has to do with peter Sellar's character Dr. Strangelove, worrying about surviving after nuclear holocaust in mine shafts. America must have more mine shafts.

A classic movie of the cold war period - very funny, black and white (on purpose). Stanley Kubrick's classic.