Bag's Rants

It is no longer MAD that keeps us sane.

Back when the nuclear bomb was first developed and it spread to other countries it was a case of 'We have to have it to protect ourselves'. The scenario was that if it was used then the other party would respond in kind and lead the to the destruction of both countries. MAD or Mutually Assured Destruction was the game. Use and be annihilated yourself.

Of course things never stay stagnant and much work was done on the neutralisation of the 'enemies' nuclear weapons and enhancing delivery of our own. ICBMs, SSBNs and stealth technology were all small steps forward and soon copied or countered by the 'enemy' leaving the balance intact while they could not be sure of getting all the launches and even if only 1% of 18,000 nukes got through it was back to the stone age for us all, those that lived of course. Their scenarios showed that enemy retaliation was never going to wipe us out although a look around shows we build major population centers around of military targets whilst they did not so infrastructure strikes meant less to them than us but our superior accuracy meant most, if not all, their leadership was history.

So for 50 years peace has reigned and the only wars being fought were conventional wars using third parties until the 'enemies' political system collapsed entirely. It was inevitable that it would whilst it did not dominate the globe and it couldn't take over whilst the western systems were still functioning. For it to survive it needed total domination so that there was no light to look up to and strive for and there was no help for the downtrodden and the will of the leaders was paramount.

So, nuclear weapons have only been useful whilst both parties have them and both parties want to live. MAD keeps them sane.

Now it seems were have forgotten the lessons of the past and are actually implementing a sub set of these systems in our own society. Such is life. Here in the UK we can't even remember the lessons learnt in the 70s so how can we be expected to remember lessons learnt before that in other countries. Damn these politicians to a new level in Hell. But that is another story.

Today I read on the comments section of the BBC website the following statement 'A nuclear power other than Israel in the Middle East might bring a balance of power to the region'. I nearly fell off my chair. How can any person think that in this day and age?

This latest bunch looking for a nuclear weapon are more than happy to die as long as they take us with them. Hell even if they only take a few they would do it. MAD no longer applies and thus the only balance that will be achieved is that a lifeless desert will be created where Israel is for starters. With Israel probably one nuke would destroy the country enough to enable it to be invaded and the fact that retaliation could take place would be irrelevant and against whom? Here in the West we usually like evidence to ensure we are doing the right thing, well, current presidents excepted of course. It stops us just thrashing around causing more harm than good. However, Israel in it's death throes would not be so kind I'm sure.

But in the end it all comes down to one thing. The countries in the nuke club have safeguards in place to control their use plus they know that to use them is tantamount to suicide, either of their country or the entire political regime. That goes for everyone not just North Korea and everyone of those seems to be happy with living and gorging at the trough of being our lords and masters.

The rest of the middle east however does not appear to be so caring. When their leaders talk about a caliphate and the arrival of the 12th Imam they are talking about the start of their domination of the globe. The 'old enemy' wanted this but their society also wanted to live so they could not get it through force. This 'new enemy' is happy to die to allow this domination and once the domination is in place there will be no coming back until this new society advances to the same stage we are now. It's already a thousand years behind and at it's rate of progress with no guiding light it will be a very long time before we get to this stage in our evolution.

On the plus side of course nuclear weapons being detonated all over the planet will drive us all into a new ice ages to the greenies will be happy. Those that are not dust of course and even then some probably still would be.

So with MAD no longer an viable option with these people can we with all conscience allow one of these other countries to be a nuclear power? In my opinion not if we do not put adequate safeguards in place to stop them moving on to nuclear weapons otherwise it would clearly be one of the more stupid of our decisions. Nuclear power for all but with a monitoring facility in place ran by anyone with an interest in monitoring them. That facility should be available to any country as long as they were prepared to fund the monitors. That way we could be reasonably confident that we were doing what we could to stop them being armed with the deadliest tactical weapons known to man.

Now, taking a step back, I can understand why everyone wants a nuke. It's still a game of they have one we want one and it seems hypocritical of us to stop someone developing one. Well, you are right, it is hypocritical but I'd rather be hypocritical and alive. You see my way would be to actually nuke these countries ourselves and take them back another few hundred years if they stepped out of line in the slightest. Our policy of examining the evidence and punishing the guilty doesn't work here because the perpetrators are dead. They are usually from a bunch of like minded countries where each country denies involvement. So what do we do? There is very little we can whilst we have the mindset we have now so containment seems to be the order of the day. Perhaps in the future we will move to be proactive and then it will not be an issue. We can treat them all as one, under a caliphate, and nuke the lot in one go.

Oh, and in case you are wondering. Biological or chemical weapons seem to be a much better way to go for these guys but they are difficult to make, store, transport and deliver although it is easier than the work required to make the warhead in a nuke. However, the nuke is seen as number one and still desired even after all these years. You have not made it as a country till you have a nuke in your arsenal.

So all in all, it's not looking too good and one day there will be a nuke detonated somewhere. The good news is that this lot are into a lot of infighting so it's likely to be 'over there'. The bad news is Israel is 'over there'. I wonder if they will make sure the Palestinians are safe seeing as they worry about them so. Mmmmm. I thought not.

posted by Bag @ 6:06 pm