US officials: 'Saudis set to buy nuclear weapons from Pakistan'

[happyslug]

49. This has been war gamed over the last 40 years and the results all always the same

The political leadership decides they can NOT afford NOT to attack, even if it means massive losses of American Lives. If the Politicians decides NOT to launch an attack, member of the opposition party will call him weak and demand his impeachment (or even Coup). That is the Political Reality of that scenario and why First Strike talk generally died out under Reagan.

This political rule, while discussed as early as the 1950s, became US official Policy under Nixon. Nixon wanted the Soviet Leadership to think he was nuts and if they did anything to bad he would launch a massive Nuclear Strike, even if that meant massive US losses.

That basic policy has NOT changed, it is still the unofficial US Nuclear policy. Once you accept that is the US Nuclear Policy (and it is), then a First Strike has no validity, no matter the results the US will launch a massive nuclear strike, be the strike be one bomb or 500 bombs (and in certain cases, left unclear to instill fear in the Soviet Leadership, conventional military action could lead to a massive nuclear strike and to a good degree that remains US Nuclear policy)

That is the reason First Strike has been a non issue since Reagan. That is the reality, no matter who is in charge in Washington, it is the Politicians who opt for Nuclear weapons way before the Military brass does. Can a sitting President, from a political point of view, NOT attack? Remember the old saying "It is easier for a Hawk that was wrong to be forgiven, then for a Dove who was right to be forgiven". That sums up most politicians view on the use of Nuclear Weapons and why they opt for them before the Military brass does in the war games over the last 40-50 years.

Thus your scenario is one of those scenario that keeps coming back but like the old joke about betting on a person walking backwards from NYC to LA, it could happen but the smart money is NOT on it. Thus General Powell comments that he can NOT see a situation where the US would use a Nuclear Weapon. The Russians and Chinese are NOT going to destroy the US for they need the US. The rest of the Nuclear powers have very limited ability to hit the US with a bomb, and if they did the US could strike back with massive conventional forces (and to a great degree this applies to China for most of its recent growth has been along its coast, thus an easy target for US Planes flying from US Bases in the Pacific. Russia is a harder target to reach but being almost land locked easier to contain with just a few conventional bombs in the right locations). Thus the US does NOT need nuclear weapons.

As to the limit of 500 bombs, as far as the US, Russia, China, Britain and France are concern, they either are at 500 bombs of less right now OR (US and Russia) can achieve that low number quickly. Thus 500 bombs is a limit that is achievable AND variable (Each could cheat but given modern technology the most Atomic Bombs AND the delivery systems to carry them to target any of them could hide from detection would be a couple at best, the delivery system being the harder to hide of the two). We could then work down to 50 each and again the major control will be on the delivery system of such weapons not the weapons themselves (if you have no way to deliver the bombs, why have the bomb?).