Re: Tin Cans versus Dreadnoughts

> I would assume, as have most SF writers, that any missile being
launched
is
> a nuke. There would no  reason not to use them in space.
>
> Corey

This is a dilemma that has had me flustered for ages. There is no reason
not
to use nuclear weaponry, and yet FT dreadnoughts can take dozens of SM
hits
before being destroyed. If each SM carries a nuke, then surely one hit
would
destroy any ship? I mean, what are these vessels built out of that
allows
them tos survive 30 missile hits intact (if barely)? The way I see it,
SMs
are non-nuclear. The reason nobody uses nukes in space or ground warfare
(except in desparation) is that it is illegal. I can imagine the UN
being
very strict on this issue, and I always got the impression that the UNSC
was
the most advanced and the most powerful human space navy, certainly more
powerful than any one national navy. By my reckoning any use of nukes
gets a
swift and brutal reprisal in the form of sanctions and blockades
enforced by
the UN - they may not be powerful enough to stop colonial warfare
altogether, but I reckon they should have no trouble imposing enough
economic loss on a nation that nukes just aren't worth it anyway.

This is just how I deal with nukes, other people may have different
solutions. One thing's for sure - no war with widespread nuclear weapons
is
in any way interesting. It's just a case of who can deliver the greatest
megatonnage fastest - what's interesting about that??

Matthew Smith