I am currently working on a group project for Political Science. We are to assume that (similar to the Cuban Missile Crisis) an enemy country has just
deposited 50 nuclear warheads in a neighboring country (Canada, Mexico, Cuba) that is an ally of theirs.
Hard to do, given all but the last are supposed to be 'allies' of OURS and Cuba is only safe so long as they remain a nuke-free state.
You also need to realize that the science of ballistic missilery has proceeded quite aways since 1962 such that a weapon could readily come from a
boat offshore 'without signature' or from a country in the Southern Hemisphere.
Tends to change the nature of the logistics as a function of available assets and sortie lengths to counter-force don'tcha think?
We know it takes two weeks for them to get the warheads fully functional, so we must find a way to get rid of the threat, without causing a war or
other snowball effects.
If the shot DID come from a proximal neighbor, they would likely be solid boostered and road mobile systems with enough stretch (in the smallest
Iranian models) to cover all of New York and Florida without hardly any site prep or assembly time at all.
We are to be the Presidents advisors, and we must tell him what we think he should do...considering that he hopes to be re-elected soon.
The problem here is that the Soviets had FROGs, nuclear demolition charges and according to an interview for a History Channel program, nuclear
variants of Styxx on FPB-M.
ALL of which would have been 'undiscovered country' in the face of a U.S. _invasion_ which was, at the time, the only really feasible way to be sure
about the heavy SS-4/SS-5 systems status.
Today, with realtime video off of fast-tasked satellites and the option of a U-2S/ASARS orbit 'just out of range' (by about 50-70 miles) of the
SA-2, there is no way we could be denied or even /challenged/ for intelligence on contruction progress, roughly every 90 minutes.
Which was what made us nervous about sending in a conventional air raid.
Past which you simply say: "Remove them or we will." And then start firing Tomahawks with about 1-5m CEP.
Kennedy, some say, was lucky that all went well when he decided to give Russia what they wanted...but my instructor says that last year, a student
came up with a plan, of how to solve this problem, using MODERN TECHNOLOGY, in a way that no snowball effects could be imagined. I am trying to
discover what this technology might be?
Kruschyev was the equivalent to Kim Jong Il in terms of being a prima donna unhappy with having shot his PR wad on a 'good will tour' in which
Americans saw him as the blowhard showman that he was. The Kennedys' mistake (and specifically darling sweety Bobby Dears) was in not sticking to
their guns with a specific policy comment that let the Russians out from under a total cavein and humiliation of their 'assassins diplomacy'.
From Eisenhower administrations U-2 overflights, we KNEW we had a monumental numerical leverage in nukes (the numbers for which the Russians either
knew or were shown) and those nukes _worked_ whereas the Russian's often did not.
And with them staring down the barrel of a bigger gun, the simple fact is, we would have been vastly better off pulling the trigger. Fewer than 20
warheads would have likely hit us. Over 500 wardets of all types in return would have ended Russia as a civilization, forever.
The difference would have been trillions of dollars in debt and a CLEAR MESSAGE to the Chinese who were undergoing their own cultural identity
The variable that was in play were the Jupiters in Turkey and those had no meaning to the conflict on OUR home turf, which the Russians knew because
they had not done the defensive and thus honorable thing which was to stage a similar protest in the UN, blockade and threat of direct intervention in
And THE REASON they had not was because they could not beat NATO and the vast U.S. nuclear superiorty specifically. Something which two generations
of Berlin Crisis had already shown.
i.e. The Russian nukes and their lack of announcement were a first strike threat. While ours could kill them six ways to Sunday /however/ we chose
to implement them. Turkey or one of the new SSBNs or bombers. And they couldn't touch anything but the top tier (decapitation) of our NCA-as-BMC2
system (NORAD was still undergoing construction and I don't think we had the Looking Glass up either).
A way to destroy, or at least de-arm, the warheads without any human casualties, without invading this "innocent" neighbor country of ours, and
without pissing of the voters of America.
My recollection was of 9 sites split roughly 1:3 between the 2,500nm SS-5 and the 1,200nm SS-4. With approximately 100 missiles fired from USN assets
that's ten missiles per site. I frankly do not give a flying bleep who dies at the sites. Or on the route in as missiles go nuts or are shot down.
I doubt, _seriously_, if the American people would either. The ROW can sit and spin or quietly cheer, just as they did with Osirak.
I was thinking that maybe there was some kind of EMI (Electro-magnetic...pulse????) that would fry the computer portions of these warheads?
The only officially acknowledged EM weapon in our inventory is the carbon filament warhead fitted to some cruise missiles and cluster bombs. It is
not perfect in that the two varieties available either damage electrical systems permanently (they also pose a mechanical and bio threat to machinery
and humans due to ingestion and skin irritation). Or are too easily cleared away to be tactically useful.
There are /rumours/ of 'HPM' or High Power Microwave generators which operate in either capacitor bank or explosive forms. The latter basically
function as single use EM shotguns that slam specific alloys together at such speed as to create a directional pulse, again as a function of being a
warhead on a cruise weapon which can bring the unit close enough to be pointed at a particular target (range is, in any case, limited).
And if so, maybe from a satellite? Other than that, I have no clue as to what modern technology could offer this problem...any info or help would be
greatly appreciated and educational...thanks.
Because of range constraints on effective pulse propogation, I don't believe that any HPM system is currently Satellite mounted.
We retain the defacto right to defang threats whose total national mass is so much less than ours that we do not feel they have as much to lose and
thus as much proven inhibition (to grow to continental nation hood requires the ability to accomodate as much as demand by force of arms) against
impulsive action as we have shown.
This 'right' is inherent to the still vastly superior nuclear arsenal of our own i.e.: "We can either pull the canine or blow off the jaw, at the
shoulders." Your Choice.
Were it not for CNN soft socialism and the generally faulted notion that 'equality is a good thing' in nuclear arsenals between nations of
disproportionate size/resource denial positioning, we would have done this a long time ago to Iran and they would be able to do NOTHING to stop it.
mod edit: added quote tags
Quote Reference (review link)
[edit on 19-11-2006 by UK Wizard]