[Beowulf] Re: "hobbyists"
kilian at stanford.edu
Thu Jun 19 10:50:50 PDT 2008
On Thursday 19 June 2008 10:19:28 am you wrote:
> This makes a number of fundamental presumptions, which may not be
> true in all cases.
> First and foremost, it assumes that the potential recipient of the
> attack or response to attack is a rational actor.
That's a very valid point. It's all been described in deterrence
theories, and the paradgim shifted from the Cold War's "deterrence of
the strong by the weak" to today's "deterrence of the crazy by the
> As seen on the
> world stage, this isn't always the case. A rational head of
> government will balance the lives lost in an attack against any
> possible gains. An irrational apocalyptic head of government will
> not likely make that calculation, but an alternative one in which
> they somehow come out a winner regardless of the events.
> Second, it assumes that the potential recipient of the attack or
> response to attack is state based. This has also been demonstrated
> to be problematic on today's world stage.
Agreed. Then how adequate is a tactical nuke against military troops in
today's world stage?
More information about the Beowulf