[Beowulf] Re: "hobbyists"

[Gerry Creager]

Geoff Galitz wrote:
> 
> 
> The MAD doctrine still applies.  Attacking advancing formations with
> tactical nukes is still a far cry from a full-scale nuke exchange. The
> former is a battlefield tactic and places limited (friendly) military units
> in danger while the latter will destroy your labor force, production
> capabilities and so on.  In spite of what we might think of how crazy those
> guys are behind the big red button the generals and politicians tend to
> realize these facts. 

While I'm less confident of our politicians (although I do have faith in 
our current Secretary of Defense: He left our University to take that 
slot from Rumsfeld and I knew him as a smart, thoughtful, insightful 
guy), I have a lot of faith in our generals.

> If I might complete devolve the thread and go waaaay off-topic.  Does anyone
> remember the movie Failsafe?
> 
> http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0058083/
> http://classicfilms.suite101.com/article.cfm/fail_safe

Slim Pickens was a MASTER!

> -----Original Message-----
> From: beowulf-bounces at beowulf.org [mailto:beowulf-bounces at beowulf.org] On
> Behalf Of Geoff Jacobs
> Sent: Samstag, 21. Juni 2008 07:54
> To: Glen Beane
> Cc: Beowulf List
> Subject: Re: [Beowulf] Re: "hobbyists"
> 
> [stuff snipped]
> 
>>> That's why I think nuclear weapons are hardly a mean to kill military
>>> troops on a battlefield. 
>> Strategic nukes, no.  Tactical nukes, yes.
> Now find an effective way of preventing a tactical exchange from
> escalating to a strategic exchange.
> 

-- 
Gerry Creager -- gerry.creager at tamu.edu
Texas Mesonet -- AATLT, Texas A&M University	
Cell: 979.229.5301 Office: 979.458.4020 FAX: 979.862.3983
Office: 1700 Research Parkway Ste 160, TAMU, College Station, TX 77843