tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37179942.post2921175336744792298..comments2023-10-22T05:51:58.898-04:00Comments on Soob: Let's Not Forget MAD, Shall We?Jay@Soobhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12208597218366281778noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37179942.post-49548043087879416762007-06-19T08:47:00.000-04:002007-06-19T08:47:00.000-04:00Tomato soup sandwhich... guacamole bath... you 700...Tomato soup sandwhich... guacamole bath... you 700-year-old Mongolian warriors are a strange breed.Adrianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05953649845499754508noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37179942.post-50647852614375897502007-06-18T23:13:00.000-04:002007-06-18T23:13:00.000-04:00Ah, and no worries about the link difficulty. I've...Ah, and no worries about the link difficulty. I've had similar tomato soup sandwiches here at my own blog.Jay@Soobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12208597218366281778noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37179942.post-68624809130860141592007-06-18T23:11:00.000-04:002007-06-18T23:11:00.000-04:00curtis,"The full scope of how this transition play...curtis,<BR/><BR/><I>"The full scope of how this transition plays out is still to be determined. MAD may continue to be operative in a limited context while proving useless as the major guiding principle or determining factor in global conflict."</I><BR/><BR/>Here's to hoping you're wrong! That kind of future with the continued existance of nuclear weapons seems a bit dodgy, to say the least. Sadly, I suspect you're right, be it within the realm of non-conventional tension or conflict or even in regards to the painful residual Cold Warrior quicksand that afflicts American policy, both foreign and domestic.<BR/><BR/>That, my friend, is not good news. <BR/><BR/>Adrian, thanks for the further exploration of MAD, especially the break down of armament. As for the game, I played the first (and politically benign) form back in the mid eighties on my Atari. Funny, never the less.Jay@Soobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12208597218366281778noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37179942.post-20970290130251973732007-06-18T15:49:00.000-04:002007-06-18T15:49:00.000-04:00Argh, I keep screwing up the links. This is the m...Argh, I keep screwing up the links. This is the missile defense game:<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://blogs.chron.com/nickanderson/archives/2007/06/missile_defense.html" REL="nofollow">link</A>Adrianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05953649845499754508noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37179942.post-13821478005596546102007-06-18T15:47:00.000-04:002007-06-18T15:47:00.000-04:00" REL="nofollow">Here's a fun missile defense game...<A HREF="http://blogs.chron.com/nickanderson/archives/2007/06/missile_defense.html<br/>" REL="nofollow">Here's</A> a fun missile defense game you can play.<BR/><BR/>Also, MAD did not begin with the Cold War, it developed later. There were considerations of whether or not to demand the USSR exit eastern Europe upon the pain of nuclear warfare (rollback instead of containment), but American strategists decided that, as of 1950-ish, the atomic bomb was not a "war-winning weapon" as nobody had enough of them. MAD could only develop once both the USA and USSR had convincing second-strike capability, requiring both numbers of warheads and reliability of delivery vehicle (i.e. once ICBMs worked, maybe 1960?). This means that something else prevented the Cold War from turning hot before the advent of MAD.<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://thebulletin.metapress.com/content/c4120650912x74k7/fulltext.pdf" REL="nofollow">Here's</A> a chart of who had how many nukes when.Adrianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05953649845499754508noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37179942.post-69457886580039896282007-06-18T15:45:00.000-04:002007-06-18T15:45:00.000-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.Adrianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05953649845499754508noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37179942.post-18015946804137759772007-06-18T07:36:00.000-04:002007-06-18T07:36:00.000-04:00John Robb refers to MAD as the "lost generation of...<EM>John Robb refers to MAD as the "lost generation of warfare." I disagree, MAD was and is the first generation of Peace.</EM><BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.fifthgeneration.phaticcommunion.com/archives/2007/01/toward_a_better_understanding.php" REL="nofollow">Arguably</A>, the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki could be called the dawn of 4GW. MAD would require indirect means for engaging in conflict, including the use of proxy warfare. The Cold War could be seen as the very first tentative steps of 4GW.<BR/><BR/>I wonder if the current debates concerning the whole arena of nuclear warfare (including <A HREF="http://zenpundit.blogspot.com/2007/06/richards-on-strategic-transformation-dr.html" REL="nofollow">ZenPundit's frequent explorations</A>, as well as GWB's current efforts) could be seen as a sign of the ending of a predominantly 4GW mindset and the beginning of a 5GW mindset. The full scope of how this transition plays out is still to be determined. MAD may continue to be operative in a limited context while proving useless as the major guiding principle or determining factor in global conflict.Curtis Gale Weekshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01804116938759031902noreply@blogger.com