|
Nuclear War Turns Heg
A survivable nuclear attack would create an endless war that kills US influence.
Katz 82[ Arthur M, PHD in Chemistry from University of Rochester and MS in Meteorology from MIT, Cambridge Massachusetts, PP 66-7)
Of particular concern in this regard is that in the counterforce scenario no one is defeated in a conventional military or political sense. Thus, the ability of the U.S. or Soviet political leaders to find a formula that implies an acceptable stalemate may require protracted internal as well as external negotiations. This protracted period of indecision leads to the disturbing possibility of what Fred Ikle described in the late 1950s as the “broken back" or unterminated war. His scenario was a nuclear exchange inflicting great damage but with sufficient surviving infrastructure so that a military stalemate with continued fighting resulted. Limited war strategy ensures a variation of this stalemated situation because a portion of the ICBM -SAC structure remains intact under the terms of the DOD scenarios along with a substantial undamaged Submarine Launched Ballistic Missile (SLBM) force. Under these circumstances, what would be the impact of this type of interminated war dragging on for weeks and months-And what are the implications for resolving this counterforce conflict? A pertinent example is the eventual Japanese public reaction against their war leadership during World War II. The public rejected the leadership's claims of omnipotence, power. And courage when damage to the society became evident… Toward their other leaders from the prime minister down, the attitude of the people greatly changed. At first, the people were proud of and greatly trusted their leaders, but as cabinet changes took place, the confidence of the people in their leadership was rudely shaken and finally utterly shattered… the people themselves were not fully united in the latter part of their war. Resentment toward national leadership, especially in bombed areas, was true of other damaged nations such as Germany, and even Britain. The important point to be made is that while the traumatic effects of counterforce by itself would be severe, the prolonged terror of an unresolved nuclear conflict would have a corrosive impact on the credibility of national leadership.
Nuclear War Outweighs Global Warming
Nuclear war outweighs global warming. Time frame, makes warming inevitable, and magnitude.
Guardian Unlimited 6 [http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2006/dec/12/nuclearindustry.climatechange]
The scientists said a sudden change to the Earth's ecosystem because of nuclear blasts would be worse than any of the effects predicted by global warming due to greenhouse gases. "Global warming is a problem and we certainly should address it but in 20 years, the temperature might go up by a few tenths of a degree and it will be gradual," said Prof Robock. "We'll be able to adapt from some of it. But the climate change from even the small nuclear war we postulated would be instantaneous and such a shock to the system"
Nuclear War Turns Fear
Nuclear war creates massive fear that makes any recovery impossible.
Katz 82[ Arthur M, PHD in Chemistry from University of Rochester and MS in Meteorology from MIT, Cambridge Massachusetts, PP 195)
In nuclear war, the situation will be quite different. The impulse is to flee, not to enter, the area, because of the terrible destruction and the fear of contamination by radioactivity. The mass convergence of external resources would be far less likely to occur in this type of disaster. It is questionable, given the scope of nuclear war, whether significant outside resources would be available under any circumstances. In addition, destruction could also overwhelm the indigenous resources and leadership that survive, as in Hiroshima. This loss would severely limit any ability to reconstruct leadership and organizational roles_ As a German Jesuit witness to the Hiroshima disaster, Father Siemes, reported: "Among the passersby, there are many who are uninjured. In a purposeless, insensate manner, distraught by the magnitude of the disaster, most of them rush by and none conceives the thought of organizing help on his own initiative. They are concerned only with the welfare of their own families." Other personal accounts of Hiroshima and Nagasaki suggest that the main pattern of behavior was to help family members and sometimes neighbors and then to escape from the city of ruins and fires into the countryside, ignoring the plight of strangers. Everywhere the victims needing help outnumbered the potential helpers and rescuers. Moreover, the physical condition of great numbers of victims was too serious for nonprofessionals-or even professionals lacking equipment and supplies-to cope with successfully. The emotionally overwhelming nature of this experience appears to have prevented spontaneous organization of rescue and relief groups. Further exacerbating these problems was the fear of renewed bombing.
Nuclear War Turns Extinction
Nuclear winter is causes extinction
The Columbia Missourian 9 [June 11, http://www.columbiamissourian.com/stories/2009/06/11/steven-starr-nuclear-expert/]
Nuclear winter is a term used to describe the dramatic global climate change that could follow a nuclear war. According to Starr’s Web site, a hypothetical nuclear war between India and Pakistan fought with 100 Hiroshima-sized nuclear weapons would throw 5 million tons of smoke into the stratosphere, enough to block 10 percent of the sun's rays from reaching the northern hemisphere — shortening growing seasons and causing the lowest temperatures in 1,000 years. After 10 years, 40 percent of that smoke would still be in the stratosphere. The average nuclear warhead today is between eight and 50 times more powerful than the 15 kiloton bomb dropped on Hiroshima.
“Nuclear war is essentially suicide for humanity,” Starr said.
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
