Jake McGuire wrote:
If U.S. civilians suddenly discovered that war was real
and not something just to watch on TV, they might not
be so eager to continue attacking me. During the next
"Korean-ish War" I would be able to demonstrate to
them how powerless their Pentagon really was when it
came to protecting *their* lives. The U.S. government
might come under a lot of internal pressure to negotiate
a settlement rather than continue the fight.

Right. Since killing small numbers of civilians to convince a country
that it needs to abandon some military venture has ALWAYS worked in the
past.

-jake

Consider who has decided to use such weapons in the past.
Hitler (V-1/V-2), Sadaam (Scud), and Nasrallah (short-range
rockets), among others. Folks who did not, or have not,
necessarily always exhibited sound strategic judgement.
But they did manage to kill quite a few people and cause a bit
of chaos. London's children and mothers had to leave town
again. Sadaam kept CNN busy chasing lost Patriots across
Arabia and Tel Aviv. Nasrallah's rockets all but shut down
the northern part of Israel for a month. The latter barrage
may have shortened the war and may play a role in the
downfall of a government.

The mere presence of such weapons could have a powerful
impact on U.S. strategy far beyond their limited tactical
effect. Today, U.S. citizens don't expect their cities to
be attacked when the Pentagon bombs or invades another
country. How much would U.S. citizens reign in their
Pentagon if they knew that future such attacks would bring
missiles with conventional warheads raining down on them?

- Ed Kyle