In a msg on , Rogier Van eeten of 2:500/3.9
writes to Bob Kohl:
 BK>>> BK>to a large degree for several reason, the primary one 
 BK>>> BK>being all the nuclear weapons still sitting around.
 BK>>> Really, they aren't a threat.
 BK>>Oh? does that include the man portal units that they can't 
 BK>>seem to keep tract of? ;)
 RVe>  The WHAT?
Man-portable nuclear devices.  Generically referred to as "backpack nukes", 
"suitcase nukes" and "briefcase nukes".
Reality since the 1950s, when the US military proposed the "Lancelot", a 
nuclear artillery shell to be fired by a howitzer.  The problem with it was 
that the blast radius included the artillery used to fire it.  Same with the 
nuclear warhead missile developed for the F-50...worked, but unless the pilot 
peeled back 180 degrees and kicked in all thrust the second after it cleared 
his wing, he was within the blast radius.  The less said about the nuclear 
"grenade", the better...it was actually a mortar round which could be adapted 
for a rifle grenade mounting, and was more along the lines of a 'neutron 
bomb' device.  Fortunately, it was halted in production before any actually 
were built beyond two prototypes.
Theoretically, the former Soviet Union had between 100 and 150 of these 
"man-portable" nuclear devices "unaccounted for"...
They don't know where they are.  They don't know who has them.  They don't 
know who will use them.
For example, Saddam Hussein has a standing offer of $10MILLION on the arms 
market to anyone who wants to sell...Qaddaffi in Libya has an offer of 
$100MILLION.
The best 'estimate' is that about 20 have been recovered or intercepted  
internationally, but since these "backpack nukes" do not 'officially exist', 
the various governments are not being forthcoming on the details.
 RVe>  The Klingons in the "TNG" world are IMHO more Japanese and there 
 RVe> for they  can't be "called" Soviets anymore.
 BK>>The Director of the last Movie with the TOS cast acknowledged 
 BK>>his allusions to the Soviets.
 RVe> In almost every American movie there is a good and evil, just like USA 
 RVe> and  USSR, just like FED. and Klingon or Romulans.
That's the basis of drama, Roger.  Drama is an examination and expository of 
conflict.
Good versus Evil, What I Want versus What You Want, Love versus Hate...these 
are the elements which make up 'drama'.
Few people go to see a performance, live or recorded, of people standing 
around and being totally gregarious.  
The episode of VOYAGER recently pointed out that same social matter, when the 
Law of the planet only wanted to believe that everyone was 'happy', and that 
violence had been purged from their collective psyche.
The Klingons were never portrayed as 'evil'...they were portrayed as 
dangerous by their ruthless expansion.  To them, the Federation was portrayed 
as 'dangerous' because it sought to contain the Klingons from expanding. 
(viz.; DAY OF THE DOVE).
The concepts of 'good' and 'evil' are tools used by governments to lead the 
masses...rather than have to explain the political, economic and other 
ramifications, the political aspect of government simply displays the issues 
in terms of 'good' and 'evil'.
In the same manner, so do films and television programs...it is done in a 
manner to 'tell a story'.
What entertainment value would there be if every race the various Trek crews 
came across were always friendly, always helpful, and always willing to 
accommodate?
For that matter, what would be the point of even leaving the planet to 
explore in the first place?
Remove the idea of "conflict" from any production, and what you have left is 
simply pap...pre-digested food, suitable for extremely small children 
incapable of independent reasoning or thought.
-zf-  Glood.
--- msgedsq 2.1
---------------