![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
Peter Skelton writes: On 24 Feb 2004 21:50:10 -0800, (WaltBJ) wrote: 2) I should think doctrine on the possible use of nuclear weapons took a serious hit when a real sober look was taken of the two nuclear accidents the USSR experienced - Chelyabinsk and Chernobyl. The USSR never ever achieved the capability to feed all its people from its own resources and what fallout from numerous nuclear weapons would do to the arable lands of the Ukraine really doesn't bear thinking about. The doctrine was gone by 1975. What we saw after that was think-tank blather about the possibility of nuclear war without escallation. Examples: on our side the potential use of battlefield weapons in Europe (we'd had them earlier and withdrawn all except tactical nukes on figfhter-bombers, IIRC) on theirs taking out naval assets (they went for really big ASMs instead or after). Uhm - _that_ didn't happen until 1990-91, with the adoption of the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty. Europe, on both sidea of the East/West divide, all through the '60s, '60s, and '80s was a forest of nuclear warheads and delivery systems. In addition to the airplane delivered weapons, there were, througn most of the '60s, a huge number of Mace (TM-61) Cruise missiles. There were scade of short range ballistic missiles, originally Redstones & Corporals, then Pershing & Sergeants, and, finally, Pershings & Pershing IIs, and Lances. Ballistic That doesn't count the battlefield systems like the Honest John Rockets and AFAPs (Artillery Fired Atomic Projectiles). Most of these systems, on the NATO side, were developed in the U.S., but the French had also developed theirs. (MSBS, SSBS, and Pluton). In the case of systems fieldsd by NATO partners, (With the exception of the wholly autonomous French systems, and hte Brits), the warheads were held in a Dual Custody arrangement, as U.S. owned and secured weapons, where their release required the agreement of the U.S. Nactional Command Authority (Warhead), and the Host nation;s Government (delivery System). If things had turned nasty before the Iron Curtain fell, there would have been Germans, Belgians, Dutch, Italians, Turks, and Greeks all firing off nukes. The Warsaw Pact side had similar systems, and similar command arrangements. -- Pete Stickney A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many bad measures. -- Daniel Webster |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|