Cardinal O'Brien on Nuclear Weapons
#20
(06-30-2009, 03:13 PM)DrBombay Wrote: Putin doesn't strike me as someone who makes idle threats. If he threatens to nuke us and we don't have the weapons to respond, he will

I can't believe your naivete.

You laid out the scenario.  Let's recap:

US unilaterally disarms.
Russia (or China) tries to use nuclear blackmail to get "our stuff".  I assumed you meant this wasn't an idle threat.

How do they do it?

I proposed a likely scenario.  If we have no nuclear weapons, why should they need to nuke us?  Why would they want to nuke us?  If they nuke us, then what do they have left?  I suppose they could devise a plan for limited nuclear carnage, just destroying major cities but leaving the resources behind.  However, how would they exploit those resources?  We would presumably still have our conventional military intact, at least major components of it.  Russia would still have to invade and fight a ground war against what I suspect would be a very angry population with lots of guns.

On the other hand, if they dumped all their warheads on us, I doubt there would be any of "our stuff" left.  They would have to dump it all on us to inactivate our military.  Russia knows what Chernobyl was like and they certainly don't want a whole country in that looks like Chernobyl. 

I still don't see what Russia would gain by nuking us.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: Cardinal O'Brien on Nuclear Weapons - by Anthem - 06-30-2009, 03:27 PM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)