Google| Subject | Re: Re:Republicanism still an offence in England? (wasRe: Queen mother |
| From | Raven |
| Date | 2002-05-22 00:40 (2002-05-22 00:40) |
| Message-ID | <K3AG8.165$Zh2.6652@news.get2net.dk> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | alt.fan.tolkien |
| Follows | T.T. Arvind |
"T.T. Arvind" <ttarvind@vsnl.in>skrev i en meddelelse news:acbu4a$rdq$1@cpca7.uea.ac.uk...
No affront to you personally. Nor to Arundhati Roy who had a piece in a Danish newspaper lately, where she chastised extremists, and some state and the national governments, because of the sectarian violence between Moslems and Hindus these days. She likened the shame that these types bring to her country with that which the Germans feel about the Nazis. The piece was a shortened and translated version of an essay found at www.outlookindia.com.RavenT.T. Arvind
They are blitheringly insane enough as it is in those two countries.
<bows>Why, thank you kindly, sir.
India and Pakistan would have to be totally insane to use nuclear weapons against each other, largely because it'd be difficult for either of us to prevent ourselves from being affected by the fallout. It's a standing joke that if Pakistan really wants to devastate India, they only need to nuke Sahiwal, Lahore or Faisalabad - all of which are in Pakistan. The fallout from that would destroy all agriculture in Indian Punjab, and much of the north of India.Which covers the case of the Cold War as well. If one side had made a great nuclear first-strike, and the other refrained from striking back, or actually had all its capability to strike back destroyed, the "winning" side would still suffer badly from radioactive fallout and the nuclear winter. Hence the folly, even if MAD is taken as valid, of building more nuclear arms than needed to destroy the enemy once. Churchill himself commented on that, IIRC, referring to "bouncing the rubble".
Kauv?.
2002-03-30-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
