Quote:
Originally Posted by Oberon
...
With religious terrorism it doesn't really matter because suicide is a perfect option, but with leaders and people who look to keep their power and keep rich while oppressing their people, they generally want to keep the status quo. Take a look at Kim, for example, he does just enough to keep his image of a 'dangerous foe' alive, but not enough that Pyongyang gets plastered.
|
A good point. There was reference to a 'cobalt' bomb at the beginning of this thread. Way, way back when I was still in elementary school, I first heard of the cobalt bomb as being in development as the net step up from the hydrogen bomb, at that time the 'mightiest' nuclear bomb of all. Later, in high school, cobalt bombs were mentioned again as having been built, but not tested. The cobalt bomb, itself, was being touted as a "clean bomb", one that would have a limited field of physical damage but a very large field of human casualties due to radiation, leaving most of the existing infrastructure and resources intact for the 'victorious' attackers. In years after high school, there were references to newer permutations of the cobalt bomb, one of which had the bomb capable of causing elemental reactions in the atmosphere so as to separate the various gases (hydrogen, oxygen, helium, etc.) into temporarily unbreathable 'pockets', suffocating the populace, yet preserving the infrastructure. I have never heard of any real full testing of a cobalt warhead and I do have doubts about how 'clean' a bomb they might be, but all the things I have heard over the years do support your contention a principal aim is to preserve as much of the wealth of a vanquished region as possible; after all, what good is it if "to the victor go the spoils", if the spoils continue to glow in the dark for hundreds of years?...
<O>