Spike Jones wrote:
>
> > John Clark wrote:
> > >
> > > A satellite is going to detect 10 pounds of Plutonium buried in the back of a truck
> > > under 3 tons of horse manure? I don't think so.
> >
> > "Michael S. Lorrey" wrote:
> >
> > Ah, but does it behave in an optical manner, mass bending the path of the
> > neutrinos???
>
> Mike you were doing fine until you pulled that neutrino business. John
> Clark is right of course, a post-NMD world is still vulnerable to plutonium
> delivered by means other than by air, and here is a thought that should
> give us pause: if we do manage to build a viable NMD, the next logical
> step is to figure out how to defeat those who would smuggle a few pounds
> under a pile of manure. Such a technology is conceivable, but it does
> lead directly to universal surveillance, for it would likely require all-seeing
> nanodetectors carried throughout the world most likely by insects. I am
> willing to pay this price. Are you?
Since they would be nanodetectors that should be only interested in
homing in on plutonium or uranium, then I would have no real trouble
with that, if its restricted to that. Have them set to set off
air-network alarm through other nanites when they come in contact with
weapons grade plutonium, and to home in on sources of helium (which is
an alpha decay product, right?) as a sniffing protocol, and you've got
your detection without universal surveillance.
>
> But before we suggest relinquishment of the technology for both for
> unisurv and and NMD, we must take the long view. As time and
> technology march on, the fortunes of the advanced and free
> rise ever farther above the enslaved masses, and thus ever increases
> their motive to see us destroyed utterly. The religiously enslaved
> for instance will make any sacrifice to prevent the wicked techno-
> devils from living forever.
>
> Always keep in mind the ultimate goal is peace and the first line
> of defense is diplomacy. But anyone who has ever been involved
> in negotiations will confirm this age old truth: that diplomacy is
> so very much more effective if one has the appropriate weapons
> to demonstrate one's sincerity. spike
THe thing I find so funny is that the scientists who were adamant for
many years that MAD was unacceptable now find it acceptable rather than
have NMD.
Now, one of the reasons the US seems big on getting Russia in on being
an NMD player in alliance with us is that Russia owns a finger of land
that goes down the coast of the sea of Japan and touches on North Korea,
right around where NK missiles would fly if headed for the US...
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 02 2000 - 17:35:14 MDT