When does a country (such as UK, Israel, US) that renounced all WMD except Nuclear Weapons acknowledge coming under attack by CW/BW if such an attack has few or no immediate casualties?
I have a specific event during GW1 in mind but this question may have current significance.
http://www.mod.uk/issues/gulfwar/info/medical/jubayl.htm
For example: Over-flight of northern Israel by Iranian manufactured drones.
From a citizens perspective, who is without protective equipment and training, a government which allows a state sponsored terrorist aggressor to experiment with attack procedures until they find the right one is exactly the opposite kind of government to that which we pay for.
But a seemingly unprovoked nuclear strike is clearly political suicide for the leader of the country subjected to a CW/BW attack, albeit incompetently. Additionally will his or her armed forces even follow such an order?
Effectively does the leader sacrifice themselves to protect the population of the country which elected them? How does the nuclear-armed country prove satisfactorily to other nuclear powers that the recently vaporized (non-nuclear-armed?) country deserved it? If it cannot it may itself be vaporised forthwith.
Finally, where does such a quandary leave the UK, US and Israeli concept of reliance on Nuclear Weapons for protection against WMD through the concept of MAD?
I suspect specfor would be used in response to such a CW/BW attack. However it may be that the CW factories can only be reached and neutralised by full scale invasion or overwhelming Nuclear attack. |