PakTribune, Pakistan
Of Little Boys and Fat Men: Why America Will Use the Bomb

By Anwaar Hussain*
April 25, 2005
Pakistan's Pak Tribune - Original Article (English)    

Little Boy and Fat Man were the first nuclear weapons used in warfare. Little Boy was dropped from a B-29 bomber, and exploded approximately 1,800 feet over Hiroshima, Japan, on the morning of August 6, 1945, with a force equal to 13,000 tons of TNT. Immediate deaths were reported to be between 70,000 to 130,000. Fat Man was dropped on Nagasaki three days later, on August 9, 1945, devastating more than two square miles of the city and causing approximately 45,000 immediate deaths. It was America that used them.

As has recently been reported in the international press, yet again the incumbent President of the United States is planning a massive bombing campaign against a sovereign country. This time that country is Iran, and the plan, which is almost sure to move forward, is to use bunker-busting nuclear bombs to destroy key Iranian nuclear weapons facilities. Given the tenor of the present U.S.-Iran stand-off, it seems highly likely that America will use nuclear weapons in the upcoming conflict.

Little Boys and Fat Men, it seems, are back in business, but with a difference. The Little Boys will now be a wee bit littler and the Fat Men a touch leaner, to pacify the outcry of the world citizenry, which has not forgotten the horrors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. These new kids on the block are called Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrators, or Low Yield Bunker Busters. They are modified versions of high-yield nuclear weapons, and are designed to penetrate the earth before detonating, with the purpose of destroying underground bunkers. It is a common knowledge that most of Iran's nuclear facilities are buried in deep, well-dug bunkers, so short of nuclear weapons, a considerable number of these facilities simply cannot be eliminated in any other fashion.

Except for the low yield bunker buster nukes that the United States is presumably already in possession of, America's current nuclear arsenal is almost entirely made up of strategic-class weapons. The destructive power of these weapons is far greater than those used at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Were America to use these weapons on any country today, it would have devastating consequences for humanity and the environment, not only in the country attacked but in the surrounding countries as well. Therefore, principally speaking, even a madman should shirk from inflicting such a nuclear attack on the human race.

For example, compared to the 15 and 20 Kiloton (kt) yields of Little Boy and Fat Man, the Minuteman III ICBM [Intercontinental Ballistic Missile] carries a warhead with a 300 kt yield, and the Trident II SLBM [Sea Launched Ballistic Missile] carries 475 kt. The B-2 and B-52 bombers carry nuclear warheads with yields ranging from 500 kt to the 1-2 megatons of the B83 mega-bomb. In any attempt to create blast and overpressure sufficient enough to neutralize hardened and deeply buried targets by detonation on the target's surface, these weapons yields are capable of inflicting a horrendous level of collateral damage. The awesome yields of these weapons, in fact, are so powerful that using these in the Iranian context would amount to killing a fly with a sledge hammer.

Concurrently, a recent Pentagon document spelled out for the first time the determination of U.S. war planners to use nuclear weapons in a military conflict. The language of the report is purposely ambiguous. The document says that nuclear weapons "could be employed against targets able to withstand non-nuclear attack," i.e. under any conditions where a conventional U.S. military assault would prove ineffective.

Even more sweeping is the suggestion in the document that nuclear weapons could be used "in the event of surprising military developments." It is clear to see that the case for the use of nukes during the current U.S.-Iran stand-off has been unmistakably established. As an occupation of Iran for the purpose of neutralizing its nuclear facilities with ground forces is not an option, the tactic of choice, therefore, is none other than the use of Low Yield Bunker Busters.

However, even if the expected economic and political costs of such a venture are disregarded, including  the violent Iranian response through Hezbollah and pro-Iran Shiite groups in Iraq, there remain deeply-rooted problems with this option.

First of all, in the 19 or so alleged Iranian nuclear facilities that are dispersed throughout Iran, it is very difficult to find a single vital choke point to attack, which would stop or stall Iran's nuclear program for a long period. Even after a nuclear attack on these facilities, not only will the element of uncertainty continue to linger in regard to Iran's nuclear quest, it may even spur Tehran into a more frenzied rush to get the bomb, in total disregard for the international community.

Secondly, not only would the use of low-yield warheads make these a cherished weapon resulting in an arms races amongst a number of potential adversaries, such an act would simply make their eventual use even more likely. That's because they promote the illusion that nuclear weapons could be used in ways that minimize their "collateral damage," making them tempting to use just like conventional weapons. In fact, it was precisely for this reason that a 1994 law [Section 3136 of the 1994 U.S. Defense Authorization Act] specifically prohibits nuclear laboratories from undertaking research and development that could lead to a precision nuclear weapon of less than 5 kt, because "low-yield nuclear weapons blur the distinction between nuclear and conventional war." But then in a world gone lawless, who cares for such legal niceties?

Third, no earth-burrowing missile can penetrate deep enough into the earth to contain an explosion with a nuclear yield of even a fraction of the 15 kt Hiroshima weapon. There will still be massive civilian casualties. Various studies have shown that for the blast to be fully contained, nuclear explosions must occur at a depth of 650 feet for a 5-kt weapon, and 1300 feet for a 100-kt explosive. Even then, there are no guarantees. Therefore, even if an earth penetrating missile were somehow able to drill hundreds of feet into the ground and then detonate, the explosion would still likely shower the surrounding area with highly radioactive dust and gas.

Last but not least, the use of nuclear weapons, however low in yield, would amount to a lessening of the nuclear threshold. As one has often said, Americans are neither the only country nor the only crazies in the world possessing nuclear weapons. Not only would American use of mini nukes be perceived as a loud and clear "go-ahead" by other nuclear weapon states, it would also be taken as the final "gloves-off" by extremist groups wherever they may be. Taking their own lives and those of others, to achieve their "blessed cause" means nothing to these zealots.

The neocons are not the only madmen convinced of their cause. Even a crude single kiloton nuke handed to a suicide bomber by a fired up scientist and then exploded by the wannabe martyr, could cause calamitous damage to the United States. The awesome power of the briefcase nuke is neither news nor a fairy tale. A few years ago, Russia's former National Security Advisor, General Alexander Lebed, went public with the startling admission that a number of Russia's atomic demolition munitions (ADMs), popularly known as briefcase nukes, were missing.

[Editor's Note: In an interview with CBS' Sixty Minutes, Lebed said, "I'm saying that more than a hundred weapons out of the supposed number of 250 are not under the control of the armed forces of Russia. I don't know their location. I don't know whether they have been destroyed or whether they are stored or whether they've been sold or stolen, I don't know"].

According to the Center of Defense Information [], "if such a nuclear weapon had been available to the bombers of the World Trade Center, most of Manhattan, Brooklyn, and Staten Island would have been leveled." What's more, "if central New York City were leveled, besides injuring and killing millions of people, the exploding bomb would destroy the following institutions, creating economic and social chaos in the world; United Nations Headquarters, Major communication centers i.e. NBC, CBS, ABC, etc., New York Stock Exchange, World banking centers where billions of dollars are transferred daily, Transportation centers within New York City and connecting New York City with other areas."

And so while the madmen decide whether to nuke or not to nuke, patting their Little Boys and Fat Men on their heads, let us heed the words of Edward Abbey, who once wrote, "While you can. While it's still here. So get out there and hunt and fish and mess around with your friends, ramble out yonder and explore the forests, encounter the grizz, climb the mountains, bag the peaks, run the rivers, breathe deep of that yet sweet and lucid air, sit quietly for awhile and contemplate the precious stillness, that lovely, mysterious and awesome space."

May we always have our "sweet and lucid" air to breathe deep.

Anwaar Hussain is a former Pakistan Air Force F-16 fighter pilot. With a Masters in Defense and Strategic Studies from Quaid-e-Azam University Islamabad, he now    resides in United Arab Emirates. He has published a series of articles in Defense Journal, South Asia Tribune and a host of other web portals. Other than international affairs, Anwaar Hussain has written extensively on the religious and political issues that plague Pakistan.