OK....
Small nuclear weapons are still nuclear weapons. You can't dress up a pig and expect me to believe that it's your Aunt Sally, Stevo. Granted, they aren't going to vaporize a city, but the principles that they work on are basically the same as what we dropped over Hiroshima and Nagasaki 61 years ago. By your own logic, why don't we use nerve gas or weaponized anthrax to kill everyone working on Iranian nuclear devices if they exist (in my opinion they do, but nothing's been proven or admitted yet)? That's what's going to happen anyway, regardless of what kind of bomb we drop (assuming we do), and we did spend all that money developing those weapons.
Regardless of how tactical nuclear weapons work, let's remember that none have ever been used before in anger. I think that any country using them, including the US, would pretty much become a priah in the international community. Then there's the question of what the Russians and Chinese would do if we use the nuclear option. Do you really want to start a new cold war and arms race with miniaturized weaponry? That's what would most likely happen.
Seriously, the excuse of "we paid for 'em so we should use 'em" has to be one of the weakest excuses that I've ever heard.
__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin
"There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush
"We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo
|