As Sagan and Valentino note, the results speak for themselves. “The main conclusions of these survey experiments are clear,” they write. “The majority of the U.S. public has not internalized either a belief in the nuclear taboo or a strong noncombatant immunity norm. When faced with realistic scenarios in which they are forced to contemplate a trade-off between sacrificing a large number of U.S. troops in combat or deliberately killing even larger numbers of foreign noncombatants, the majority of respondents approve of killing civilians in an effort to end the war.”
The results do strongly suggest the nuclear taboo and norm against targeting civilians have not taken hold, at least among the American public.…
Perhaps the most important lesson of the survey is that it is imperative to cultivate strong, far-sighted leaders to guide the country abroad. After all, respondents suggested they were willing to support a president’s decision even if it was not their preferred choice. The need for far-sighted leadership is especially pressing at a time when improved accuracy is giving America the ability to use smaller nuclear bombs that cause far less civilian casualties. In the wrong hands, these bombs could be tempting to use, even though doing so would let the nuclear cat out of the bag, with uncertain and potentially catastrophic repercussions.The National Interest
Report: Americans Support Use of Nuclear Weapons If It Saves Lives of U.S. Military
Zachary Keck
6 comments:
When you give people a question like that they are bound to say yes, until you show them the photos is the destroyed cities, the millions dead, the charred bodies, but would they ever see the photos and get a description of what happened, the millions of charred bodies? Like as in Hellstorm, the truth would be suppressed.
The people who wrote in and said the Germans got what they deserved made fair comments, the Germans had started the war and had killed millions of people but we must never let a situation like that ever occur again. At that time we had three psychopaths in power, Hitler, Churchill and Stalin. Churchill starved three million Indians to death.
As for those small nukes they should be banned, if one falls into the hands of a jihadists they could destroy a large part of a major city killing thousands of people and contaminating a city.
The Chinese frown upon revenge but revenge is a large part of western culture, it's especially prevalent in our Hollywood films. So we fight evil with our own evil and evil continues destroying the world mutilating innocents as we saw in Hellstorm.
Keep an eye on the indo-china war. It has been heating up with more hand-to-hand warfare, clashes, artillery fire. Check out this video from Aug 15 of units in close combat exchanging fire and stabbing. Clearly some fatalities.
China didn't build new bunkers, highways, and move troops into Indian territory to promote harmony, I don't think.
Kevin,
You should watch the 1983 TV movie The Day After - Everybody must be made to see the movie to understand the danger of nuclear weapons - tactical nukes can very easily escalate into an all out nuclear exchange.
Also to be watched Threads
Here is a comparison - 'Threads' (1984) vs 'The Day After' (1983) - an in-depth analysis
Here is 1984 Newsnight Nuclear Debate (Broadcast after 'Threads' & 'The 8th Day')
Also On the 8th Day - Nuclear Winter Documentary (1984)
What's up with human nature? I'm quite happy living in my small terraced house getting on with my hobbies. In one direction I'm in beautiful countryside within minutes and in the other direction its a 15 minute walk to the hypermarket. Life is sweet. I look at the photos that Ryan said look at and I think WTF. What a horrendous thing, all that military build up? What a waste of money too? It's like our darkest, most evillest parts of our minds. It's freaking scary.
Propaganda works. Nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki "saved" millions of lives. Except of course that Japan was already completely defeated. But it was thought necessary to use the bombs to demonstrate the awesome power of the US to Stalin, who won WWII.
Japan's surrender was not based on atom bombs - nearly every city had been firebombed to the ground (to the point where there were virtually no undamged targets on which to "test" the atomic bomb) - it was spurred by Russia's declaration of war on Japan on August 9, 1945.
Post a Comment