Dear Scumbria:
Over 200,000 died in the last nuclear attack. The only thing that has been saving us is the cost, infrastructure, and logistics in creating nuclear weapons. Actually more have the ability to make ballistic missiles than the weapons themselves and now you can buy, at least, the missiles from China and Russia (and maybe even a Russian tactical nuke). North Korea has tested missiles with a range of 1800nm and have stated that they will test one that goes about twice that. That begins to get to Anchorage Alaska. There are many military bases and other prime targets in Alaska. If they double it again (7200nm) now you begin to hit places like LA, SF, Seattle, and Denver. One nuclear weapon is all it takes to ruin the life of hundreds of thousands of people.
As for asteroid deaths one need only look to Siberia in 1908. The fact that only a few dozen died was only due to the low population density. Its like hitting Denver around 1700. If it happened above NYC, it would have killed millions. Actually your chances of dying due to asteroid impact are about the same magnitude as being hit by lighting. Of course, if an event like the one 65 million years ago occurred today, there would be over 6 billion dead, and countless trillions of their descendents with it. We force industry to spend billions so that one or two lives could be saved per year. Matter of fact, more than 95% of the cost of a nuclear power plant is in dealing with regulations and safety standards that spend billions to save one life in 50 years.
It is better to have a capability in place before one needs it than, all the pain and suffering that is caused by not having it at all. Besides, if it is not necessary, why did the Russians have such a system currently deployed defending Moscow?
Pete |
