Nuclear war

Should the world just get a nuclear war over and done with?

  • Yes

    Votes: 1 8.3%

  • No

    Votes: 7 58.3%

  • I like Koalas.

    Votes: 4 33.3%
  • Total voters
    12
Kindbud421

Kindbud421

Well-Known Member
bam0813 said:
Australia wont have any survivors. You don’t even have nuclear weapons and china is already eyeballing you . Do you really believe any survivors will just get on with it after nuclear war? Laughable . Agree the world deserves it lately
Click to expand...
Yes, let’s poison the earth for the next 10,000 years. Animals in cherynobyl area are just starting to breed out the mutations. And that was a minor disaster. Humans will not be able to enter that area unshielded for another 1000 yrs. I am sure there are multiple underground facilities available for the “elite” but that is not us… and who is left? All the rich individuals that make all the rules anyways and all the nukes!
 
C

CCGNZ

Well-Known Member
Kindbud421 said:
Yes, let’s poison the earth for the next 10,000 years. Animals in cherynobyl area are just starting to breed out the mutations. And that was a minor disaster. Humans will not be able to enter that area unshielded for another 1000 yrs. I am sure there are multiple underground facilities available for the “elite” but that is not us… and who is left? All the rich individuals that make all the rules anyways and all the nukes!
Click to expand...
it's just crazy w/all the matter of fact nuke war talk,people are like if it happens it happens,WTF,are these people kidding themselves.All I know is that people turn into animals after 72-96 hrs. w/no electricity,just a nationwide 3-4 day blackout would have gangs,rapes,and all kinds of malfeasance,a free for all. That's just power out and nothing else,we couldn't even come together in the pandemic. We nor the world for that matter can even think about going down the road w/nukes. It's also frightening that a total exchange between Pakistan and India,2 countries who can'teven keep their grids fully electrified for 24 hrs.,might cause a "Nuclear Winter" if they detonated 100 nukes between themselves over religious hatred of all things.
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
CCGNZ said:
it's just crazy w/all the matter of fact nuke war talk,people are like if it happens it happens,WTF,are these people kidding themselves.All I know is that people turn into animals after 72-96 hrs. w/no electricity,just a nationwide 3-4 day blackout would have gangs,rapes,and all kinds of malfeasance,a free for all. That's just power out and nothing else,we couldn't even come together in the pandemic. We nor the world for that matter can even think about going down the road w/nukes. It's also frightening that a total exchange between Pakistan and India,2 countries who can'teven keep their grids fully electrified for 24 hrs.,might cause a "Nuclear Winter" if they detonated 100 nukes between themselves over religious hatred of all things.
Click to expand...
The first power to use a nuke in anger (since Japan) will be a global pariah. This has a higher deterrence value than retaliation in kind.

The other thing that puzzles me are how many people equate any nuclear war at all with an inevitable slide into world-burning spasm exchange. I don’t subscribe to that idea.
 
Kindbud421

Kindbud421

Well-Known Member
CCGNZ said:
it's just crazy w/all the matter of fact nuke war talk,people are like if it happens it happens,WTF,are these people kidding themselves.All I know is that people turn into animals after 72-96 hrs. w/no electricity,just a nationwide 3-4 day blackout would have gangs,rapes,and all kinds of malfeasance,a free for all. That's just power out and nothing else,we couldn't even come together in the pandemic. We nor the world for that matter can even think about going down the road w/nukes. It's also frightening that a total exchange between Pakistan and India,2 countries who can'teven keep their grids fully electrified for 24 hrs.,might cause a "Nuclear Winter" if they detonated 100 nukes between themselves over religious hatred of all things.
Click to expand...
If, and it’s a big “IF” , I survived… no knock on my door will be met with welcome. 12 ga keeps my stuff mine and Eff all others. They’d have to survive the walk from the nearest city and that’s 25 miles away. I’d stay out and let the major cities collapse. Don’t need electricity, only food and water… besides, there are Amish to learn from around here… lol
 
CANON_Grow

CANON_Grow

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
The first power to use a nuke in anger (since Japan) will be a global pariah. This has a higher deterrence value than retaliation in kind.

The other thing that puzzles me are how many people equate any nuclear war at all with an inevitable slide into world-burning spasm exchange. I don’t subscribe to that idea.
Click to expand...
Curious what makes you believe this to be true? Maybe the "in anger" is the qualifier in your statement, but what if a nuclear strike was claimed as self defence? Say Israel uses a conventional weapon against Iran, and Iran does possess enough material to lob a nuke back? Or Iran attacks Israel and Israel responds with a nuke?
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
CANON_Grow said:
Curious what makes you believe this to be true? Maybe the "in anger" is the qualifier in your statement, but what if a nuclear strike was claimed as self defence? Say Israel uses a conventional weapon against Iran, and Iran does possess enough material to lob a nuke back? Or Iran attacks Israel and Israel responds with a nuke?
Click to expand...
In anger in this instance means aggressively or as an act of war.
Whoever responds to a conventional attack with a nuke is gonna be public-opinion toast. Self-defense sophistry be damned.
 
CANON_Grow

CANON_Grow

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
In anger in this instance means aggressively or as an act of war.
Whoever responds to a conventional attack with a nuke is gonna be public-opinion toast. Self-defense sophistry be damned.
Click to expand...
What leads you to believe that? I see far more instances of countries not really caring what happens elsewhere if their country (or themselves) can still benefit from maintaining relations with any country.
 
CANON_Grow

CANON_Grow

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
… to the extent of a nuking?
Click to expand...
If a conventional war was to occur between China and India, and China sends a strategic nuke into India, you really believe that the rest of the world will stop dealing with China? Countries will say all the right things, really condemn the use of them, and likely call a few summits to discuss what can be done, but I don't see any scenario where the world is able to isolate China.
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
CANON_Grow said:
If a conventional war was to occur between China and India, and China sends a strategic nuke into India, you really believe that the rest of the world will stop dealing with China? Countries will say all the right things, really condemn the use of them, and likely call a few summits to discuss what can be done, but I don't see any scenario where the world is able to isolate China.
Click to expand...
Imo China starting a nuclear war is very unlikely. It’s not the sort of scenario that advances the discussion.

However, should that happen, I foresee China losing a LOT of trade. Imagine the ad campaigns.
 
CANON_Grow

CANON_Grow

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
Imo China starting a nuclear war is very unlikely. It’s not the sort of scenario that advances the discussion.

However, should that happen, I foresee China losing a LOT of trade. Imagine the ad campaigns.
Click to expand...
Simply using it as an example to illustrate the threat of being a pariah is not the real deterrent, not saying someone is going to lob a nuke for shits and giggles. EDIT: Not saying that whoever throws the first nuke isn't going to experience any blow back, it will be painful for them as well.

Seeing that Japan is willing to circumvent sanctions on Russian oil, or South Africa (by the sounds of it) is willing to ignore their ICC obligations if Putin shows up, both indications of wanting to say the right thing but willing to turn a blind eye if the result is beneficial to them.
 
Last edited:
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
CANON_Grow said:
Simply using it as an example to illustrate the threat of being a pariah is not the real deterrent, not saying someone is going to lob a nuke for shits and giggles. EDIT: Not saying that whoever throws the first nuke isn't going to experience any blow back, it will be painful for them as well.

Seeing that Japan is willing to circumvent sanctions on Russian oil, or South Africa (by the sounds of it) is willing to ignore their ICC obligations if Putin shows up, both indications of wanting to say the right thing but willing to turn a blind eye if the result is beneficial to them.
Click to expand...
I think we have a different perspective.

I’m sort of hoping it doesn’t come to a test.
 
Lucky Luke

Lucky Luke

Well-Known Member
Kindbud421 said:
Yes, let’s poison the earth for the next 10,000 years. Animals in cherynobyl area are just starting to breed out the mutations. And that was a minor disaster. Humans will not be able to enter that area unshielded for another 1000 yrs. I am sure there are multiple underground facilities available for the “elite” but that is not us… and who is left? All the rich individuals that make all the rules anyways and all the nukes!
Click to expand...
What about people in more remote parts of the world who maybe hardly effected and currently live a more of a hand to mouth existence?

 
Lucky Luke

Lucky Luke

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
Imo China starting a nuclear war is very unlikely. It’s not the sort of scenario that advances the discussion.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

China and India seem to get on well. China is India's largest trading partner and they have extended their strategic and military ties of late.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top