Quote:
Originally Posted by ikalugin
Skybird, you attribute mystical properties to physical objects - nuclear weapons. I understand the futility of debating a subject matter with a person who expresses irrational behaviour, but I will do this none the less.
The power of nuclear weapons despite being great is finite and can be accessed rationally. That power is great enough to deter any rational adversary from attacking as even 10 percent population losses the USSR suffered in the GPW are too great a cost to bear (not to mention material losses).
However that power is not great enough to assure the total loss of life, especially for protected populations. So it is not a suicide, as suicide implies total and final loss of life by the subject. This means that if there is a chance that deterence may fail and that chance always exists a responsible leader must take measures to ensure survival of the country.
Morever as historic programs show it is quite plausible to both assure general survival after the attack and to both beging rebuilding and maintain military relevant production after the attack.
Because with such measures the attack would not lead to total and final loss of life nor material means to sustain such life I do not see why I should not keep living and working after such an attack. Sure my personal living conditions would be inferior to those I have at the moment, but then I would still have means to improve them through my hard work, so I don't see a problem there.
p.s. Soviet programs were on a qualitevely different level than the "duck and cover" stuff. There were comprehensive plans to not only achieve survival of crtical personel, but also of critical industries, to maintain war production, to initiate post attack rebuilding.
|
And if the party/the state has planned it, it must be good. - You are a hopeless believer of state and its authority. But you call me irrational. Well. Irony surely has some twists and turns build into it.