Which country with nuclear weapons frightens you the most?

[TCO]

Originally posted by Lefty Scaevola


Not real bright , eh? A neutron bombs purpose is to kill enemy troops (originally Warsaw pact forces) on allied territory (originally West Germany) without trashing said allied territory. Their use is tactically angainst invading troops.

Nahh. The reason for the neutron bomb is to be used against armor. Several inches of steel tend tobe pretty good protection against regular nukes. But the neutrons go right through it.

[Lefty Scaevola]

Since most of the Warsaw Pact troops are in AFVs during most of a campaign, duh. And civilian buidling and built of better neutron insulators than armored vehicles. Also troops in defensive positions, with dirt and concrete around them, are much safer than attacking troops in AFVs. Al of which confirms the stated policy of their use against attacking mechanized forces.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Lefty Scaevola
Since most of the Warsaw Pact troops and in AFVs during most of a campaign, duh.

I normally give you a break on the grammar, but I couldn't understand this last remark.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Lefty Scaevola
Since most of the Warsaw Pact troops are in AFVs during most of a campaign, duh.

I'm still not sure what your point is. You said the reason for the neutron bomb was to avoid damaging the landscape. I said the reason is because neutrons penetrate steel sheilding better than gamma rays or blast waves.

[Lefty Scaevola]

Well, the duh, is that is obvious (at least so guys like you and me with some background) that any weapon systems designed to deal with Warsaw pact ground forces would have (steel) armor piercing as a major criterion. You do not fight T64s, T72s, BTRs and BMPs with shrapnel. I was focusing on the less common characteristics of the weapon, how it increased ban for the buck while reducing the ration of colleteral damage to intened effect, becasue the ignoramus I quoted above thought it was a weapon intended for killing civilians.