Posted: Dec 17, 2007, 8:10 AM CST
Millions survived Chernobly and millions more recently surived Hurricane Katrina...a storm experts estimated had the power of 4 nuclear devices.
Man kind has been surviving limited nuclear events or like nuclear events. The two devices dropped at the end of WWII were in a sense limited exchange and millions of Japanese survived.
Conrad, I don't know where the end to man kind begins in a number of nuclear detonations. Personally, I hope we never get that close to knowing it. They shifted to underground testing in part because the ground zeros in test ranges were getting to "hot". Some point with a large number of detonations means that the ground will simply have to much radiation to support life. I do stand by the idea of surviving limited number of nuclear detonations. We have been doing it for a number of years now.
Which takes me to Iran.
I remember in a Pol Sci class discussion on nuclear prolifleration of the 1972s, a student asking the instructor "What happens when 3rd world
countries get the bomb?" The instructor looked like a plucked duck for a moment, thumbed the text book that had two parargraphs on it and shrugged his shoulders. Even then we had a lot of material (thinking) on the cold war and mutual self destruction that neither wanted to achieve.
But countries with radical faiths and strong terrorist connections are a real night mare when you add nuclear devices. Many have been working problems and rewriting the text, but I have yet to see the 'answer' here.
In 2002, Iran is said to have stopped its nuclear weapons program. But when Russia offers to supply nuclear fuel rods that can be accounted for use in Iran's civilian reactors. Iran balks and says it needs it own nuclear enrichment program. Why?
With terrorist groups, Iran has a delivery means that provides it with something called "plausible denieablity". Iran knows that if it uses a few nuclear devices in some missile strike, there is no 'plausible denieability'. That Iran ends as a country to the retailation strikes. So still desiring to end Isreal as country, Iran uses conventional dirty nuc in several key Isreali cities and forces the long term exodus of millions. That is my take on why Iran refused the Russian offer and is its 'game plan' of present.
Whether that 'plausible denieablity holds water to the Isreali? I doubt. But to many western nations, it will hold water and they will stay out it. It will hold water with both the Russians and Chinese. It will hold water on the Moslem street and Islamic world.
Up some 370% (265 in 2007) since 2002 with the most recent arrest and recovery in Slovika. Terrorists can get thier hands on nuclear materials without Iran. And that adds into this idea of plausible denieablity for Iran.
Iran was pressured to change its nuclear weapons program. A step in the right direction. But I think that it changed to this dirty nuc plan and this pausible denieability concept with terrorist groups as delivery mean. That the South Lebanon rocket strikes against Isreal last summer by Hezbollah was a test.
Conrad, I do realize that this is a very real and dangerous issue. I am using the term 'game' for the benefit of the younger ones that might not remember the cold war as do you and me. I don't want us to go back to those days either. But does seem that is where Russia is intent go these days. President Putin gets upset over the placing of 10 inceptors in SE Europe? When he has 1000s of devices?
The interceptors were meant to take down a limited number of Iranian missiles, not a Russian assault. Russia is using Iran and Iran is using Russia. And we are being dragged back in the cold war.
Let us just keep shaking hands
and toasting the other
One of the best way to fight these guys, that I know of.
