arms-d@ucbvax.ARPA (05/21/85)
From: The Arms-D Moderator (Harold Ancell) <ARMS-D@MIT-MC.ARPA> Arms-Discussion Digest Volume 3 : Issue 36 Today's Topics: Neutron weapons, Soviet armor tactics Danger from South Africa (response to J. Miller) What is the Definition of DEFCON? Evacuation response ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 20 May 85 01:43:02 cdt From: Scott Renner <renner@UIUC.ARPA> Subject: Neutron weapons, Soviet armor tactics > Gee, I always thought that the ``neutron bomb'' was canned because it was > expensive and ineffectual as an anti-tank weapon. Nope. The neutron bomb was cancelled for political, not military reasons. Some folks will tell you that it was canned as the result of an intensive, well-orchestrated Soviet propaganda effort. > Ineffectual: As a Russian tank commander faced with an opponent armed with > enhanced radiation artillery shells, you can just change tactics slightly to > render the ERWs pretty ineffective: space your tanks farther apart (I think > about a half-mile apart is enough)... > -- (dm@bbn-vax) The U.S. Army could hardly ask for anything else. Tanks spaced that far apart will never achieve the local superiority needed for a successful attack on the modern battlefield. From what I've read about modern armor tactics, the attacker needs anywhere from 3:1 to 10:1 odds in the vicinity of the attack. This can't be achieved without creating an enticing target for an ERW. ------------------------------ Date: 20 May 85 12:24:09 CDT (Mon) From: ihnp4!mgnetp!ltuxa!ttrdc!mjk@Berkeley Subject: Danger from South Africa (response to J. Miller) > please share with us >whatever information you have pertaining to threats against black US citizens, >here in the US, originating from South Africa. Although it doesn't *precisely* meet your criteria, a student at Columbia University and a participant in the divestment protest there is now threatened with immediate imprisonment should he return to South Africa because of his activities here in the U.S. At least one family member was picked up by the South African police and interrogated -- because of his actions here in the U.S. There is, of course, first the question of *how* the South African police knew about his participation in a large demonstration at an American university; I'm sure an "intelligence professional" such as yourself can tell us all about that. But more importantly, here is an example of intimidation of the free speech rights of a person living here in the U.S. Is it too far of an extrapolation to imagine a time when the South Africans, facing a much more serious situation than they do now, start employing squads to operate in the U.S. to "stiffle" the outspokenness of people here which threaten their government? But the real point of my admittedly snide remark is that it is very easy for you to "objectively" evaluate the geopolitical pros and cons of U.S. support for the apartheid government. I'm trying to remind you that real people, not "players", suffer under that government. In the same way that Jews feel a special revulsion towards the holocaust, blacks feel a special pain at apartheid. I wonder if a black person in your position could be quite so smug. Mike Kelly ------------------------------ Date: Mon 20 May 85 17:07:15-EDT From: Bard Bloom <BARD@MIT-XX.ARPA> Subject: Re: Arms-Discussion Digest V3 #35 What does DEFCON mean? ------------------------------ Date: 1985 May 20 01:08:10 PST (=GMT-8hr) From: Robert Elton Maas <REM@IMSSS.SU.EDU> Subject: Evacuation response > Date: Thu, 16 May 85 14:36 CDT > From: Patrick_Duff <pduff%ti-eg.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa> > Subject: What-if USSR evacuates all cities > > ... Suppose you are the > President of the US and one of your advisors comes rushing in with the > following report: At 12pm Moscow time, First, I'd fire my advisor. There's no such thing as 12pm. 12 is the boundary between AM and PM, and midnight is 12n (nuit; not AM nor PM) wile noon is 12m (meridian; again neither AM nor PM). > the USSR posted notices in all > major population centers giving instructions to the inhabitants to begin > immediate preparations to leave the city and disperse. The notices call > this activity a "training exercise" or a "drill". ... What action > should you, as President and Commander in Chief of the US, take, and > why? (5) Start evacuating US cities (1 vote--last I heard, the U.S.'s evacuation plans are too incomplete and too far out-of-date to make this response practical); That's my major choice. First check for confirmation, then announce to networks that in 5 minutes you'll have a major announcement to make, then get on the hotline and explain to the Soviets that you don't know whether they are really doing a training exercise or not but in either case we want to respond in kind: If it's a good training exercise, we ought to train too, and ours will be more realistic since we had no advance warning; If it's a cover for an attack, we want to minimize civilian casualities. Now (that took 5 minutes on Model 33 TTY) go on the air to the public announcing the Soviet evacuation. Explain what we said on the hotline, that we don't want to get caught with our pants down. The Soviets are probably not planning an attack, but just in case we want to evacuate too. Even if they're just training, we might as well take this opportunity to run a surprise evacuation training of our own. In the event of a nuclear war, we probably have supplies for only about a third of the populace, so it would be counterproductive to evacuate more than a third of our population. I (President REM) therefore reccommend that anyone preferring to die instantly rather than slowly should stay where they arenow, while anyone preferring a chance at survival no matter how unlikely or painful should collect any personal valuables that can't be replaced and snatch a week's supply of water and food, then join a carpool and head out of the cities and away from military installations as soon as possible. Persons staying behind can guard property against vandals in the event this turns out to be just a training exercise and not a real attack. Persons trying to leave but getting stuck in traffic jams should return home or scrounge around for an alternate route. Just because our evacuation plans aren't decent doesn't mean that in the event of this scenerio we ought not to at least put up a show. With our citizens scrambling from the cities, any real attack won't totally wipe us out (except by nuclear winter). After a couple days when the Soviets end their exercise we end ours. If they continue longer, trying to outlast us on food and other supplies, we start shipping supplies from the cities out to where people are hanging out. In the absense of a real attack, we can probably wing it as long as the Soviets can. Our imperfect evacuation may just deter an attack if that's what they were planning all along. (Point of debate. I think maybe our present lack of preparation combined with the above contingency plan may be optimal for avoiding nuclear war. Don't provoke increased hostility by running evacuation exercises now, but prevent a Soviet first-strike from being effective if they evacuate first. Anyone have a different opinion?) ------------------------------ [End of ARMS-D Digest]