All Bets Are ON

[Stephen D. Williams]

We already have 'Poor Mans Nukes', i.e. FAE (Fuel Air Explosives), which 
we've been using frequently lately.
  FAE's take the place, to a large extent, of tactical nukes with none 
of the political or actual fallout.

Talking about using actual nukes, which I disagree with but I'm not 
irrational about either, is likely a red herring to both scare potential 
and actual enemies and to be a bargaining chip.

sdw

John Hall wrote:

>1) It depends on the target.  If we need to take out the target and this is
>the only way, it is what we will use.  The fact that "the rest of the world
>will hate us" isn't news, they already do.
>2) It also depends on who it is used upon and for what reason.  In the case
>of a serious biological attack, the nukes won't necessarily be tactical.
>3) They will do the van in Manhattan when they can.  Using or not using
>nukes before then won't make a difference.
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: fork-admin@xent.com [mailto:fork-admin@xent.com]On Behalf Of Eugene
>Leitl
>Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2002 2:40 PM
>To: John Hall
>Cc: forkit!
>Subject: RE: All Bets Are ON
>
>On Sat, 9 Mar 2002, John Hall wrote:
>
>>Yes, the person who leaked should spend some serious time behind bars.
>>
>
>Or given a medal. What next, locking up John Young? I think not.
>
>>No, it was not responsible reporting.
>>
>
>Nope. You first use a nuke, even a 1 kT tac nuke somewhere in
>Buttfuckistan, you're dead meat.  Because then you'll get your van, or
>hirise nuke, in Manhattan, or elsewhere.  Because the whole world will
>hate your guts. Me, too, in fact.
>
>And, no, you can't prevent a determined attacker, even if everybody is
>strutting down the street with an anal probe and teledetonable cranial
>explosive.
>
>
>
>
>http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork
>
>
>
>http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork
>

-- 
sdw@lig.net http://sdw.st
Stephen D. Williams 43392 Wayside Cir,Ashburn,VA 20147-4622
703-724-0118W 703-995-0407Fax Dec2001