|
|
|
Subject:
In Defense of Thinking
Jonzey
12/14/2006 2:54:06 PM
|
In Defense of Thinking: A Comparative Analysis (excerpts)
by Terrance Jones
(Topics taken From Thinking about the Unthinkable by Herman Kahn, Horizon Press, 1962; pp. 1- 38; © Hudson Institute)
Many terrible questions are raised when one considers objectively and realistically the problems created by the cold war and the armaments race. For some years I have spent my time on exactly these questions,both in thinking about ways to prevent war, and in thinking about how to fight, survive, and terminate a war, should it occur.
Kahn, "In Defense of Thinking"
How likely is accidental war?
The likelihood of accidental wars occurring have increased with the introduction of nation state ascension strategies that have sought to manipulate the democratic system of government. When rogue and or terrorist affiliated parties are able to secure influential roles in the government of the nation state, the opportunity for terrorist inspired catalysis will threaten all facets of the societal affairs of the same. Palestine and Lebanon are clear examples of nation states that have diluted the democratic form of government due to the influence of terrorist affiliated political parties like Hamas and Hezbollah. Also, the nation state ascension paradigm works in concert with the expansionist agenda of enemy and competitor nations seeking to gain strategic advantages through threats of aggression and or warfighting variables that are articulated by way of their alliances with nation states with terrorist affiliations.
Example
While China appears to side with the international community in regards to preventing the nuclear proliferation designs of North Korea, few experts believe that China would allow preemptive attacks that would institute a regime change that would also reduce the buffer zone between China and the American backed side of South Korea. Preemptive strikes are clearly an issue that would spiral into an accidental war between America and China. Any increase in America's war on terrorism in the Middle East will motivate North Korea to accelerate their proliferation program in hopes of facilitating the noted America/China conflict that would occur should America attack North Korea.
How dangerous is the arms race today?
Today, the nuclear arms race is more dangerous than it has ever been. Strategic alliances formed between rogue, terrorist and competitor nations has set a potentially catastrophic paradigm that also sets the stage for a proliferation based catalysis effects at the least concerning nuclear arms. These effects have Iran primed to become the first Islamic fundamentalist nation with a nuclear weapons capability. In regards to proliferation, a nuclear armed Iran easily projects to its Shia allies in the Middle East with Syria being amongst the most dangerous of them all. Also, it must be remembered that occurrences in the Middle East have brought fundamentalists from diverse backgrounds together. By sharing their technology, Iran would rapidly expand their influence within and outside of the Middle East due to Iran's relationship with Russia and China. This relationship therefore, could affect at least three continents in regards to proliferation.
What would conditions be if a nuclear attack leveled fifty of America's largest cities?
The conditions of the last point will have a dramatic effect on this question:
Example
There is a strong chance that this type of attack could come from a fundamentalist or rogue nation like Iran or North Korea.
This reality is due to the technological assistance that North Korea and Iran have received from China and Russia. An attack of this sort could decimate America's global position, as America would face the perceived scenario of being attacked by rogue ghosts within a rogue or terrorist nation state. The failure of an immediate response will only increase the chances of an inappropriate response.
Some time must be spent on assessing if China and or Russia facilitated a proxy war attack from one of their proxy war subordinate nations.
While an immediate response is the best response in this scenario, it should not precede a quick analysis and probe of China and or Russia's complicity in this type of attack. Should they be found guilty of participating and or sponsoring the attacks, the immediate response of a counter attack will be easier to implement and articulate to the rest of the world.
Would the survivors envy the dead?
Regrettably, there will be many cases where the survivors of a nuclear attack will "envy the dead" as Dr. Kahn notes, however, the full magnitude and scope of this trend will depend heavily on the leadership of the attacked nation. The appropriate response to a nuclear attack must also address the needs of survivors in order to ensure that societal compliance is in accord with the needs of the nation as well. Japan's survivors felt helpless due to the fact that they had no atomic weaponry with which to respond, therefore, leading to capitulation and eventually a total surrender to the Allied forces during World War II. America's highly advanced nuclear technology along with their ability to counter attack from a variety of strategic positions is what will prevent a similar occurrence from happening. |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Latest
News |
Most
Read |
Hot
Topics |
|
|
|
