Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: MSI who wrote (69590)	1/28/2003 5:55:32 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) of 281500

Check out what Ullman actually has said below. I'm copying a small excerpt in which he discusses Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The link leads you to a detailed exposition of his writings on the subject. Go to the Table of Contents at the bottom so you can get the entire thrust of what he has said. He clearly acknowledges that destruction at a Hiroshima level is probably unworkable. The guy is not dumb, fer cryin' out loud. Get a grip. vbg. I would like to see a photo of him, though, see if he looks like Dr. Strangelove or the obscenely fat Herman Kahn. dodccrp.org The second example is "Hiroshima and Nagasaki" noted earlier. The intent here is to impose a regime of Shock and Awe through delivery of instant, nearly incomprehensible levels of massive destruction directed at influencing society writ large, meaning its leadership and public, rather than targeting directly against military or strategic objectives even with relatively few numbers or systems. The employment of this capability against society and its values, called "counter-value" in the nuclear deterrent jargon, is massively destructive strikes directly at the public will of the adversary to resist and, ideally or theoretically, would instantly or quickly incapacitate that will over the space of a few hours or days. The major flaws and shortcomings are severalfold and rest in determining whether this magnitude and speed of destruction can actually be achieved using non-nuclear systems to render an adversary impotent; to destroy quickly the will to resist within acceptable and probably unachievably low levels of societal destruction; and whether a political decision would be taken in any case to use this type of capability given the magnitude of the consequences and the risk of failure. C2@letthesuckerssweatitoutanyway.BOOOM!.com

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next