[Beowulf] Re: "hobbyists"
gerry.creager at tamu.edu
Sat Jun 21 07:50:11 PDT 2008
Geoff Galitz wrote:
> The MAD doctrine still applies. Attacking advancing formations with
> tactical nukes is still a far cry from a full-scale nuke exchange. The
> former is a battlefield tactic and places limited (friendly) military units
> in danger while the latter will destroy your labor force, production
> capabilities and so on. In spite of what we might think of how crazy those
> guys are behind the big red button the generals and politicians tend to
> realize these facts.
While I'm less confident of our politicians (although I do have faith in
our current Secretary of Defense: He left our University to take that
slot from Rumsfeld and I knew him as a smart, thoughtful, insightful
guy), I have a lot of faith in our generals.
> If I might complete devolve the thread and go waaaay off-topic. Does anyone
> remember the movie Failsafe?
Slim Pickens was a MASTER!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: beowulf-bounces at beowulf.org [mailto:beowulf-bounces at beowulf.org] On
> Behalf Of Geoff Jacobs
> Sent: Samstag, 21. Juni 2008 07:54
> To: Glen Beane
> Cc: Beowulf List
> Subject: Re: [Beowulf] Re: "hobbyists"
> [stuff snipped]
>>> That's why I think nuclear weapons are hardly a mean to kill military
>>> troops on a battlefield.
>> Strategic nukes, no. Tactical nukes, yes.
> Now find an effective way of preventing a tactical exchange from
> escalating to a strategic exchange.
Gerry Creager -- gerry.creager at tamu.edu
Texas Mesonet -- AATLT, Texas A&M University
Cell: 979.229.5301 Office: 979.458.4020 FAX: 979.862.3983
Office: 1700 Research Parkway Ste 160, TAMU, College Station, TX 77843
More information about the Beowulf