1.) Methinks your curiosity does not provide you carte blanche to pry into people's personal religious beliefs.
2.) Any nation that prompts a nuclear exchange will not have much for their population to return "TO". Whether it be a coal mine, or the mass underground complex that the Russians have built in the Urals, what will remain of their countries will be so contaminated for 20-50 years, people will question whether or not it was worth it.
3.) Those bunkers make little sense when there exist earth-penetrating nuclear devices that, if directly penetrated these complexes, will likely cave them in.
pacificnews.org
The weapon, called the "B61 Mod 11," is a 12-foot long nuclear bomb that can burrow some 50 feet into the ground before detonating with a blast many thousands of times greater than the largest conventional weapon in the U.S. arsenal. Nuclear war planners -- yes, they are still busy, despite President Clinton's constant assurances that the threat of nuclear war has disappeared -- claim the "earth penetrator" is needed to destroy Russian command bunkers buried deep underground.
So Ken, while I don't see a great probability of a pre-Y2K nuclear exchange due to the severe consequences to all participants, I do see the possibility of militaristic activities on the part of China and Russia should their economies collapse to the point of perceived irreversibility.
The greatest distraction for a grievously unemployed population is to go to war and take out your frustrations on your neighbors. That scares me, but I guarantee you IT SCARES THE JAPANESE, INDIANS, ARABS AND EUROPE FAR MORE.
And Ken... I think this discussion is accomplishing nothing except jerking around our worst fears (any of which do not require Y2K to occur). So I'd rather not have you post to me anything else referencing nuclear conflict. It is not worth the time it takes to type up the responses.
Regards,
Ron |
