In article ,
wrote:

Howard Berkowitz wrote:

:It probably would have been used only after the nuclear threshold had
:been crossed, but that might not mean much to the people near the
:bridge.

I think I disagree with Howard. The point of using these things was
so that you didn't have to unleash tactical nukes on big Soviet tank
formations to stop them. You could just blow all the bridges quickly
and slow them down that way.

It's hard to say. _Soviet Military Strategy_, written under the
direction of Marshal Sokolovsky and originally translated by the RAND
Corporation [a summary available at
http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/a...976/may-jun/wh
iting.html] strongly suggests, along with other sources, that the
Soviets planned first use of theater nuclear weapons in a large-scale
attack on Western Europe. As you know, the Soviet decision whether or
not to strike first has been debated in many future predictions as well
as staff studies. See both volumes of Sir John Hackett's _The Third
World War_ for scenarios with and without Soviet nuclear first use.

I would agree, Fred, that the first NATO use of nuclear weapons indeed
might be to take out chokepoints such as bridges and mountain passes.
Perhaps I didn't make it clear that when I spoke of crossing the nuclear
threshold, I believe that threshold would first have been crossed by the
Warsaw Pact, principally to isolate the battlefield and hard-kill air
support and C3I in preparation for the major ground attack.


By definition, *some* nuclear threshold would have been crossed at
about the time the first one went off, but since these things would be
targeted against infrastructure in advance of the Soviets, it would be
rather difficult for them to claim them as justification for crossing
the nuclear threshold themselves.

They were also another good reason why we declined to sign a 'no first
use' policy. We intended to use these things first, because blowing
all the bridges made good tactical sense.

Unless you're practically living on the bridge, these things aren't
really a problem for neighbors. Don't overestimate effects just
because the bugaboo word 'nuclear' (actually 'atomic') is involved.
They'd have a much bigger problem from that Guards tank regiment going
through their carrot patch if the bridge was left up.