disturbing report: nukes may fall into taliban's hands??

Rodent of Unusual Size Ken.Coar@Golux.Com
Thu, 11 Oct 2001 14:42:53 -0400


Personally, I find the possibility of an A-attack on the
U.S. rather more disturbing than a B-attack.

A-weapons have a higher guaranteed yield in terms of
anti-personnel effect than B-weapons.  At a minimum,
even a tactical device detonated in any target area
will ensure direct casualties (incineration) in the
hundreds, and secondary casualties (radiation) in the
thousands.  That's a minimum.

In addition, atomic weapons have been a cultural bugaboo
for over half a century; I think that has tarnished their
'horror weapon' escutcheon a trifle.  B-weapons are
still bright and shiny in that respect, in part because
of their very insidiousness.

Put it this way: If a B-attack is launched against the
U.S. (or the coalition or whatever they're calling it
this week), no-one would suggest nor countenance a reprisal
in kind.  However, I don't think that is necessarily true
for an A-attack.  Not only do I strongly suspect that
a reprisal-in-kind would be suggested, but I think it
may well receive serious consideration, and less condemnation
than the B-attack scenario.

And once *anyone* uses A-weapons, the gates of hell are
open..
-- 
#ken	P-)}

Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini  http://Golux.Com/coar/
Author, developer, opinionist      http://Apache-Server.Com/

"All right everyone!  Step away from the glowing hamburger!"