[Peace-discuss] Nuclear Posture of the US

[Karen Aram]

From Jean Bricmont:

my reaction to the new nuclear posture of the US:

My impression is that this is still a militaristic boondoggle. I still cannot believe that, crazy as they are, the US generals would launch a preemptive strike against a nuclear power. Remember that, for that to work, one has to knock off all the adversaries nuclear weapons. Could it work against North Korea? Maybe, but I doubt it.

Launching a nuclear attack against a non nuclear power like Iran might work, but would provoke a world wide negative reaction against the US and I doubt that they will take that risk.

Finally, what about a conventional attack against a nuclear or non nuclear power? For a nuclear one, the danger of nuclear escalation, which is almost certain to occur, is too great. For a non nuclear power, which one? Given the results in Iraq, Syria and Libya, I don’t see how that can work either. The conventional forces of Iran are far too strong.

My objections to their policies are two fold: it is huge waste of money, both for the US and for its potential targets (Russia, China etc.) where there will be also a military using this to boost its own spending; and, more importantly, it increases the risk of a nuclear war by accident. As we saw during the other Cold War, this is a real possibility.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20180208/24e677e4/attachment.html>