Hi Lomu,
Time for the 2nd quarter .
I struggle to see any scenario that doesn't make us more unsafe if we acquire strategic nuclear weapons .
The 2 obvious answers to your questions are Indonesia and China.
If we acquire such weapons , the obvious response by Indonesia is to acquire them as well.
If Indonesia gets them , then the case for us getting them changes.
With China , how many would we need to counteract their arsenal? I would contend , more than we can afford, and it would have to be at the expense of spending on the much more likely conventional attack.
And the other question about nuclear weapons is when would you use them?
Cant imagine a first strike on China , unless you had a death wish .
A revenge strike ?
Again , if you had a death wish.
A bomb gets lobbed onto Perth from Temu , along with a email saying ''next one is Sydney/Canberra if you don't behave'' .
I think the term to describe this situation is ''snookered''.
Because only a psycho [ or Canavan ] would go for the all out attack model.
No , for me , unless Indonesia gets them , spend our bucks on conventional defense , not nukes.
And spend enough , and spend it on the right stuff , that we don't have to rely on someone like the Don to come to our aid.
Now there is another scenario which is worth thinking about.
Tactical nukes , both as a defense against naval attack , and dropping it onto advancing armies in our North , we might get away with that , without forcing armageddon .
Disclosure: I quite like the direction that Labor seems to heading on defense, not wholly , but overall a tad more logical than what has gone before.
Now back to the thread title , unless you are feeling really lucky, punk , I would keep any nuclear facilities under Federal Government control.
cheers
Expand
