tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37179942.post6873296685135532628..comments2023-10-22T05:51:58.898-04:00Comments on Soob: Small Scale Nuclear Proliferation: The Bane of Global OrderJay@Soobhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12208597218366281778noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37179942.post-57888658119823191432008-07-17T21:24:00.000-04:002008-07-17T21:24:00.000-04:00Thank Arherring!Flagg,Excellent comment and I agre...Thank Arherring!<BR/><BR/>Flagg,<BR/><BR/>Excellent comment and I agree whole heartedly. The sheer investment in terms of brains and cash seems to be a very effective moderator in nuke proliferation. Which is why my hypothetical scenario entailed a qualifier of imagined mainstream nuke proliferation. <BR/><BR/>I'd add to your WWII reference that the Japanese also served (in the death of hundreds of thousands) a very real example of what nuke war would look like. And, in this respect, provided a visceral template for nuclear war that might have otherwise not existed and so were the a huge part of the catalyst that spawned MAD.Jay@Soobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12208597218366281778noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37179942.post-49013068525196439212008-07-17T09:32:00.000-04:002008-07-17T09:32:00.000-04:00Interesting post, Soob.I wonder, though, at how tr...Interesting post, Soob.<BR/><BR/>I wonder, though, at how truly effective such a small arsenal would be outside of the deterrence realm.<BR/><BR/>The care and feeding of the "physics package" and associated "energetic devices" needed to field a credible nuclear weapon are substantial.<BR/><BR/>Just having the fissile material is nice and all, but if this is a homegrown program, then there have to be enormous expenditures on the electronics, making sure your Pu is pure enough to prevent a fizzle, like our NORK friends experienced, you have to make sure your design is robust enough to deliver via artillery, airplane or missile. And all of those associated technologies aren't cheap either. And we won't even go into the expense of either the enrichment program or reprocessing program needed to build up the stockpile in the first place.<BR/><BR/>But, if we are just gaming the scenario and assuming a country wants to take on the cost and has the expertise to pull it off (or some Weapons State decides to go into business and sell and arsenal along with a "service contract" to maintain the weapons - a whole different type of proliferation worry and one the Saudis might try to set up with the Pakistanis once Iran acquires her bomb), then yes, we would see the potential for enormous proliferation.<BR/><BR/>Until someone sets one off. After the initial shock and horror, most analysts will then realize that, while very messy and locally devastating, the nukes probably weren't worth all the expense.<BR/><BR/>Nukes worked as a game changer in WWII because the Nipponese needed a reason to capitulate and could blame the superweapon for something they wanted to do anyway. In today's world, lighting off a nuke, especially if you only have one or two (and assuming, by the way, your tiny little stockpile doesn't fizzle) then your enemy will be highly motivated to engage you in a violent manner.<BR/><BR/>Interesting post.Flagg707https://www.blogger.com/profile/00372325313824525136noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37179942.post-52175093062134642672008-07-17T00:39:00.000-04:002008-07-17T00:39:00.000-04:00I just suggested over at D5GW that you wiegh in on...I just suggested over at D5GW that you wiegh in on the blogtank. Guess I should have checked first.<BR/><BR/>Nice post!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com