"Robert J. Bradbury" wrote:
>
> On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 CurtAdams@aol.com wrote (regarding using the
> atomic bomb against Russia):
>
> > Hitler killed tens of millions of Russians and captured/destroyed the
> > majority of its prewar industry and army and that *still* wasn't
> > enough.
>
> Yep, the point of this is very clear. Stalin played the delay
> game long enough to get his industry relocated to the Urals
> where Hitler's bombers couldn't reach it. Both Napoleon and
> Hitler stumbled on the sheer size of Russian and its massive
> population and resource reserves.
>
> We should heed those lessons -- a pan-Arabic state stretching from
> Algeria to Pakistan with 500+ million people, united under
> a single leader (Hitler/Stalin prototype) and/or an interpreted
> (irrational) religious unifying force, with atomic weapons
> *is* something to be seriously concerned about.
The missing piece, of course, is the lack of manufacturing industry in
the muslim world. The overwhelming majority of wealth generated from oil
in the muslim world has been wasted on consumer spending or invested in
industrial assets in other, mostly western, countries. Thus it is
impossible for the muslim world to ever sustain a concerted, organized,
modern war against the west, so long as it does not gain the support of
a significant industrialized nation (like, say, China). I would posit
that if we do see a major world conflict in the 21st century, it will
align the muslim world with China, against North America (and the rest
of the Anglosphere), Europe, Japan and the other Tiger Economies, and
the Russian Federation. India would be caught in the crux, and likely
will become the major battleground like the Korean Penninsula.
Establishing stockpiles in southern India to support rapid deployment of
forces would be a smart tactic.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat May 11 2002 - 17:44:21 MDT