Would arabs/Iranians use nukes if they got them?

[Lancer]

Wouldn't the MAD doctrine apply to them? But what of terrorists? Who to nuke if NY gets nuked and we don't know which group did it, nuke them all? If that is the only answer that might deter arabs/Iranians I think we should announce it as doctrine.

If any terrorist group nukes us the areas of the world that support that group will be nuked.

Discuss

[Tuberski]

India and Pakistan do have nukes and haven't used them. Yet.

ACK!

[Imran Siddiqui]

Define "support".

Also a lot of these terrorist groups would be counting on the US to retaliate and overreact. That's how they gain new recruits (people thinking maybe the West is that bad).

[Zkribbler]

IMHO, MAD does apply to Arab states & Iran. However, I see three possible scenarios where nuclear weapons can be used.

First is a situation like in Pakistan and India, where there's two neighboring nuclear powers with a long history of animosity. While neither would plan to have a nuclear war, their mutual hostilities will color their perceptions, and any resulting miscalculation could lead to an accidental nuclear war.

Second is where Israel (or perhaps us) conclude that it's a good idea to launch a pre-emptive strike against Iran's nuclear arsenal. And say, the pre-emptive attack takes out eight or nine of Iran's ten nuclear bombs. At that point, the Iranians will be so enraged, they'd use their remaining bombs.

Third is where a country like Pakistan becomes destablized, and rogue elements within it believe its a good idea to slip some nukes to al Qaeda or some other non-state terrorist entity. While MAD applies to Pakistan, non-state actors might believe their landlessness will protect them from retaliation.

And it wouldn't make much sense to retaliate against Pakistan because it wouldn't have been their official government who passed on the nuclear weapons. Rather, it's a rogue.

[Naked Gents Rut]

And it wouldn't make much sense to retaliate against Pakistan because it wouldn't have been their official government who passed on the nuclear weapons. Rather, it's a rogue.

Who cares? You should turn Pakistan into a sheet of glass anyway, just to make sure it never happens again.

[Traianvs]

Originally posted by Tuberski
India and Pakistan do have nukes and haven't used them. Yet.

ACK!

Indians and Pakistani aren't Arabs nor Iranians

[Traianvs]

Arabs or Iranians wouldn't use nukes. Their leaders are not irrational as some may think. They want to hold on to power, and initiating a nuclear war isn't going to keep them safely in control. The externalities of a nuclear attack would be disastrous as the entire world would unite against them. Nah.

Terrorists is another matter. A few lunatics with a lot of spare cash could do the trick. Still you'll have to ask yourself: would it help my cause to drop a nuke on say NY? What have I to gain?

First of all the entire world would be horrified. A mere 5000 dead (of which a significant number were not of American nationality) on 9/11 sparked a rigourous campaign against terrorism, effectively making it an essential element in American foreign policy. Imagine what a nuke would do. The instigators would be hunted all over the world. Even in Afghanistan or Pakistan I doubt they'd hold out for long.

Secondly, killing a few million US residents in NY would gain them what exactly? A huge loss of life, money etc for the US, but the States are such a huge country it would only enrage them even more. The fact there hasn't been any significant terrorist attack on American soil since 2001 is telling...

Whether they kill several thousand, or several hundreds of thousands won't make the difference for them. They want media attention, but not as much as to get everyone against them: they're doing the attacks for a reason. They don't want themselves eliminated. From what I've read about the 9/11 attacks, the results were more spectacular than they themselves had anticipated. Commons sense dictates they won't use nukes. But like I said it only takes a few lunatics with too much money on their hands...

[Lancer]

Tuberski, they aren't Arabs/Iranians. (nuts)

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Define "support".

Also a lot of these terrorist groups would be counting on the US to retaliate and overreact. That's how they gain new recruits (people thinking maybe the West is that bad).

That would depend on whether there were any left to recruit. This is my point. We tell them that if they can't police their people they won't have a people to police. We will not be nuked twice.

Zkrib, this policy would eliminate any percieved need to nuke Iran ahead of time.

Traianvs, you can't have a situation where a group of 10 Arabs ala the WTC attack nukes millions and when we kill those ten its over. Nope, that wouldn't work at all. Need instead to clean out the place where that hatred was born so it won't happen again.

You can say alot about MAD, but it worked. If we put forward this policy then pot smoking leftists will once again cry against the inhumanity of it, but just maybe nobody will die.

[Imran Siddiqui]

That would depend on whether there were any left to recruit. This is my point. We tell them that if they can't police their people they won't have a people to police. We will not be nuked twice.

Once again, define "support"

Are you nuking the entire Muslim world? Because if you just nuke Iran, Pakistan, Syria, the rest of the Muslim world will be incensed and you will have new recruits in droves.

And if you nuke the entire Muslim world, well, the entire world will be incensed and welcome to World War III as Europe & Asia tries to overthrow the American Hitler.

[Naked Gents Rut]

Because if you just nuke Iran, Pakistan, Syria, the rest of the Muslim world will be incensed

Why? Do you think the rest of the Muslim world really gives a **** about Iran?

And if you nuke the entire Muslim world, well, the entire world will be incensed and welcome to World War III

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

[Tuberski]

Originally posted by Traianvs


Indians and Pakistani aren't Arabs nor Iranians

I read arabs/indians.

Thought muslim/indians.

ACK!

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Naked Gents Rut
Why? Do you think the rest of the Muslim world really gives a **** about Iran?



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

Yes, yes. When it comes to actually using nukes, forget about petty squabbles.

[Naked Gents Rut]

The various factions present in the Muslim world hardly consider their squabbles to be petty.

As for Europe and Asia, they don't give a **** about the Muslim world so long as the oil keeps flowing. They're not going to fight WWIII against the U.S. over their non-existent concerns for the well-being of Muslims.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Nuking the Muslim world (as it seems Lancer is implying) = oil not flowing that much anymore.

Seems quite obvious.

[Naked Gents Rut]

Why? You think Muslims build their cities in the middle of oil fields?

Even if the oil fields were destroyed, what's the more intelligent response for Europe and Asia? Help the U.S. rebuild and get the oil flowing again? Or start WWIII and ensure the deaths of millions of your own citizens?