Would arabs/Iranians use nukes if they got them?

[Heraclitus]

Originally posted by Naked Gents Rut


Why not? You actually helped the Nazis carry out the Holocaust.

You do realize that Nazi's where European right?



Also you completely missed the deliciously cynical point of my post.

[Heraclitus]

Originally posted by Lancer
See, that's the way of the world. The Arab terrorists nuke us so we nuke them and its all our fault. Well fine. We're strong enough not to have to worry about what the idiotic euros think.

Stand back or get your share of the spank.

We're even strong enough to smile about it.

But wait wouldn't nuking a billion people put a dent in your immediately available nuclear fire power? Wouldn't this be a great opportunity for the Ruskies or the French to nuke the US to glass?

[Barnabas]

It wouldn't be worst than the Holocaust, I doubt more than 6 million people would die.

How many cities would they have to nuke to kill more than 5-6 million people?

If I recall correctly in Hiroshima and Nagasaki only a couple of hundred thousand people died.

[Dr Strangelove]

I think we should consider the context of this hypothetical use of nukes. Is it Iran firing nuclear armed missles at Israel or NATO? If so they've got real problems, because immediately they'd be at war with the whole world, including possibly Russia and China. They would have utterly no friends of any sigificant importance left. Israelis retaliation would be automatic, and there would probably be a UN force occupying Iran eventually. In fact I would forsee the Russians possibly occupying Azerbaijan in order get their armor into Iran.

A nuke snuck into Israel or a western country and detonated by terrorists poses a different problem - how to trace it. Possibly the nuclear signature will indicate the country of origin and I'm sure that the world's major powers would insist upon independent verification, given how grave the matter is. Once the origin has been found the country making the bomb is going to face some huge problems. Assuming that the offender would be Iran or Pakistan it would probably be placed under some sort of UN supervision - I imagine the Security Council would feel compelled to act in unity. If the offender resists it would probably face a world at war with it. Eventually the terrorist group responsible would be identified. If the responsible party were Hamas or Hezbollah I think there would be some sort of occupation of its areas of operation, by Israel, NATO, the UN or a 'Coalition'. I'm certain that Syria would quickly dissassociate itself from the group and willingly co-operate. If the group responsible is al-Qaeda then there's a problem - they're already at war and currently at least holding their own. Would the international community force Pakistan to permit it to allow a Coalition force to enter its territory and occupy the areas where al-Qaeda operates? What if the nuke were Iranian and the user were al-Qaeda? That would be sort of a 'two fer' for the Neocons. They would get an American occupation of everything from Ar Rutbah to Lahore.

[GePap]

Originally posted by aneeshm


It's not the billion people dead, it's the fact that all our old enemies would be gone in one shot.

Given that the third largest Muslim population in the world is in India, we will have to nuke India as well, to be sure.

I guess if the price we must pay for this deeply immoral fantasy of yours is your own death in nuclear fire....I am okay with it.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Given that the third largest Muslim population in the world is in India, we will have to nuke India as well, to be sure.

[Lonestar]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


It looks to be about 100 miles. Not nearly far enough to avoid effects of a nuclear blast.

I'm not sure if you understand what "Yield" means, and what kind of tonnage would likely be used on urban centers.

[Whoha]

There isn't really going to be any sort of limited war, which is why we're working on SDI.

Why? Do you think Europe and Asia really gives a **** about the Muslim world?

They'd probably care about all of the radioactive fallout dropping on them, regardless of the ultimate source of that fallout.

[Naked Gents Rut]

So they're going to start a war with the U.S. that will ensure more fallout (from nuked European and Asian cities)? Come on...

[Whoha]

I am sceptical that they will accept the deaths of however many hundreds of thousands or millions of people as just the cost of doing business, or to put it another way, bowing to nuclear blackmail. Perhaps if we only use ER weapons could total war be avoided in that scenario.

[Lancer]

Originally posted by Heraclitus



But wait wouldn't nuking a billion people put a dent in your immediately available nuclear fire power? Wouldn't this be a great opportunity for the Ruskies or the French to nuke the US to glass?

I hadn't thought of that, Hera.

[Lancer]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
I think we should consider the context of this hypothetical use of nukes. Is it Iran firing nuclear armed missles at Israel or NATO? If so they've got real problems, because immediately they'd be at war with the whole world, including possibly Russia and China. They would have utterly no friends of any sigificant importance left. Israelis retaliation would be automatic, and there would probably be a UN force occupying Iran eventually. In fact I would forsee the Russians possibly occupying Azerbaijan in order get their armor into Iran.

A nuke snuck into Israel or a western country and detonated by terrorists poses a different problem - how to trace it. Possibly the nuclear signature will indicate the country of origin and I'm sure that the world's major powers would insist upon independent verification, given how grave the matter is. Once the origin has been found the country making the bomb is going to face some huge problems. Assuming that the offender would be Iran or Pakistan it would probably be placed under some sort of UN supervision - I imagine the Security Council would feel compelled to act in unity. If the offender resists it would probably face a world at war with it. Eventually the terrorist group responsible would be identified. If the responsible party were Hamas or Hezbollah I think there would be some sort of occupation of its areas of operation, by Israel, NATO, the UN or a 'Coalition'. I'm certain that Syria would quickly dissassociate itself from the group and willingly co-operate. If the group responsible is al-Qaeda then there's a problem - they're already at war and currently at least holding their own. Would the international community force Pakistan to permit it to allow a Coalition force to enter its territory and occupy the areas where al-Qaeda operates? What if the nuke were Iranian and the user were al-Qaeda? That would be sort of a 'two fer' for the Neocons. They would get an American occupation of everything from Ar Rutbah to Lahore.

They nuke us and then we have to do another multi billion dollar occupation?

Anyway the point of this is to prevent the nuking of us in the first place by getting the Arabs to police their own people and therefore prevent a retaliation.

Save lives...

[Lonestar]

Originally posted by Naked Gents Rut
So they're going to start a war with the U.S. that will ensure more fallout (from nuked European and Asian cities)? Come on...

Fallout wouldn't come from cities(airburst nukes) but rather from attacks on military bases(specifically missile silos and places underground)which would be from groundbursts.

[Heraclitus]

Originally posted by Barnabas
It wouldn't be worst than the Holocaust, I doubt more than 6 million people would die.

How many cities would they have to nuke to kill more than 5-6 million people?

If I recall correctly in Hiroshima and Nagasaki only a couple of hundred thousand people died.

You do realize we are talking about nuking the whole of the Muslim world or at least a whole middle eastern country right?


But even nuking a single city might cause more than 6 million deaths, if it had a large population (perhaps a Pakistani. Bangladeshi city or maybe Cairo)

[Deity Dude]

Originally posted by Naked Gents Rut
So they're going to start a war with the U.S. that will ensure more fallout (from nuked European and Asian cities)? Come on...

Since these are hypotheticals. How would the US react to the following scenario:

Russia could proves that Mexico for some reason was involved in providing the Chechnians with a Nuke that was used against Russia.

IN response, Russia nukes Mexico and at the same time poisons the entire Southwest of the US with nuclear fallout.

I am pretty sure that there would be some sort of "response" by the U.S.