John,
Your numbers are about right, and as I had pointed out from some past readings and as I posted earlier about the Neutron Bomb and this whole topic(s) for the troops not killed outright, it's the pissed off I'm going to be dead within a month (Or less.), far from home troops that are now HIGHLY motivated to quote Gunny Vanderee, will want to "get sum!!", no thanks, that's one of the reasons why we abandoned the above weapons program altogether and destroyed what we had in the mid 90's. Russia has done the same I believe under the same treaty, primarily though because it was felt that this weapon would actually lead to the use of conventional battlefield field nukes. The best is first, you can substitute other nukes here as well as all produce radiation, this was just the nastiness one of the tactical nukes.
http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/a...-aug/snow.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/395689.stm
http://www.thewednesdayreport.com/twr/neutron-bomb.htm
http://home.netcom.com/~ncoic/n_bomb86.htm
I have to agree with some of the analysis given in the refs, that our advances in
ATGW and tanks would've acted as a bigger deterrent along with the fears the use of these weapons both nuclear and chemical would've just lead to the strategic level-again as I've stated earlier...game over! The noble experiment was tried in a game called "Sixth Fleet" by SSI, you had a turn one option only from either side to use a tactical nuke on an opposing carrier. The carrier and submarine firing unit were taken off the board. Pretty optimistic that it would stop at one, I thought that when playing it back in high school along with "Red Star White Star" that had a nuke option as well. And something no one really talked about is the effects EMP would have on modern equipment. My feeling is play on with what we have besides, there are some cool things yet to come including the new TOW with double the range I'm following and is almost to approval for production.
Regards,
Pat