This scares me more than a little.....

[GAsux]

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...toryID=2857692

Nothing good can come from such a debate.

[Sethomas]

I wonder how anyone can say with a straight face that nukes could be used against terrorism.

[GAsux]

Im a little shocked that anyone would argue rationally that we would use nukes to fight ANYTHING. Of course I'm all for death and destruction and what not.

We've already demonstrated that we possess overwhelming fire power and tactical capabilities. I fail to see what positive benefits could come from upping the ante with a nuke. Moreover, even if it's only rhetoric and used as a bargaining chip, people only negotiate out of fear for so long. At some point the hand is called and a person is forced to use such a weapon to prove they are willing. That scrares the bejesus out of me.

At least in the past we used to pretend like we cared about the moral high ground. Even it was only lip service, at least we tried to play the game as if we were the better man. Bringing theater deployable nukes into the equation throws that out the window and proves to the world that we are little more than hypocrites.

I don't see this happening, but the mere thought that it's even a subject for debate disturbs me.

[AChimp]

The U.S. army ALREADY has low-yield nukes that can be carried in suitcases, fired from Howitzers and an infantry version that can be fired by two soldiers from a bazooka.

What other kinds do you need?

[GAsux]

Chimp you kill me! Let me think if I would want to be the guy firing even a low yeild nuke from a "bazooka". Ha ha!

[AChimp]

I didn't say they thought it through. :P

From what I've read, it's a very, very low yield and is meant for blowing up tanks. I guess it was developed in anticipation of really heavily armored tanks. :/

[Zero Signal]

Ironically, the larger the nuke, the less fallout that is produced. :/

[Carnivore]

"You see a bug hole, you nuke it!"