Quote:
Originally posted by Rudey
I thought the pentagon was working on smaller scale nuclears capable of providing damage without destroying neighboring areas. Aren't there other weapons that have the high kill rate without lingering damage?
-Rudey
|
Actually from what I understand they were working on two different types of "nukes" for specialized uses..... the first is a "nuke" bunker buster, capable of digging damn far down under a hard surface and directing the blast shockwave at the suspected bunker (there was talk of it being deployed or tested in Afghanistan or against some of the more eloborate Iraqi bunkers)..... the second was something along the lines of what you thought, a smaller nuke that is as "clean" as possible so as to eliminate as many of the after-affects as possible; these "tactical" nukes have been around since the 80's and its just a matter of refining the technology and deploymeny method. With a tactical nuke you want it to be an airburst directly above the enemy troops or material, so that they recieve the full blast effects, as well as the intitial and lethal radiation dossage (short half-life). The lingering radiation is actually as result of remaining particulate matter that has been irradiated by other "slow" or long half-life radiation (i can't remember as a nuke puts out more than one radioactive particle), so the more crap you kick-up in the blast the more radiation will be left, no matter how clean the initial blast.
While most of this is Cold War era technology for planning a defense against the masses of the Warsaw Pact, it can be easily adapted for use in the Korean Pennisula, well because they use the same tactics for the most part.