Global thermonuclear war: still a risk?

Seismosaurus said:
I've heard it said that Japan could likely build an ICBM within a year or two at the most if they really wanted to. But given their history, it would be a hell of a controversial thing for them to do - basically only acceptable if national survival was at stake.
Click to expand...



I imagine its quite possible they have already built one or have a plan for quickly putting together one just in case. Japan like other countries will have secret military programs. As has already been mentioned the technology is already there.
 
Seismosaurus said:
there are those in the world who would think sending their own population off to heaven as martyrs for the sake of killing a million or so Americans would be a hell of a good deal.
Click to expand...

Who?

~~~~~~~

The US 1996 plan to bomb Libya using tactical nuclear weapons was subsequently shelved but could presumably be reactivated. Neither Russia or China would take kindly to that. China has warned the US that an attack on Pakistan wold be considered an attack on China.

As the reality of resource depletion hits the global economy, the likelihood of nuclear war increases. US power, sitting on top of a basket-case domestic economy, is now almost totally dependent on military might to sustain itself. A bully is at his/her most dangerous when cornered and desperate.
 
But is a localised exchange between India and Pakistan likely to result in a global scale nuclear strike on the part of the US and Russia?

Not that such a local exchange of intermediate range weapons between two middle powers would be any less horrific mind you, but I'm really looking to find out of it's a realistic scenario for the major powers to engage in an all out strike in the modern age... Has the time where it was a justifiable concern passed us by?
 
nvidiot said:
But is a localised exchange between India and Pakistan likely to result in a global scale nuclear strike on the part of the US and Russia?

Not that such a local exchange of intermediate range weapons between two middle powers would be any less horrific mind you, but I'm really looking to find out of it's a realistic scenario for the major powers to engage in an all out strike in the modern age... Has the time where it was a justifiable concern passed us by?
Click to expand...


We've seen a "humanitarian" no-fly zone, supposedly to protect civilians, escalate into a prolonged, bloody, civilian-slaughtering military invasion. Those who start wars always seem to forget that war isn't controllable.
 
Last edited:
Bikewer said:
The only nation besides ourselves with sufficient warheads and delivery systems would be Russia, to my knowledge. Although there is some degree of parity in terms of sheer numbers of warheads, I believe that the Russian delivery systems have fallen far behind after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
I understand the missile-launching submarine fleet is considerably impaired, for instance.

Right now, I believe it's the case that a single one of our ballistic-missile submarines could cripple any nation on Earth.
Click to expand...

Who do you mean by "us" in the parts I have added Bold to, when you post in this international forum with members from many countries around the world?

Apparently "ourselves" is a nation. Let me guess... you must be referring to God's chosen nation, the entitled and most important one at the center of the known universe.

It seems the only forum members you are writing to are those who are with you in your trench, inside a besieged Fortress America, and sharing your America-centered nationalist view of the world.

IF you are aware that some non-Americans forum members exist here, do you regard them as foreigners who are peripheral to the discussion? Apparently we are not included in your definition of "us" when you post here.
 
OldBloke said:
Who do you mean by "us" in the parts I have added Bold to, when you post in this international forum with members from many countries around the world?

Apparently "ourselves" is a nation. Let me guess... you must be referring to God's chosen nation, the entitled and most important one at the center of the known universe.

It seems the only forum members you are writing to are those who are with you in your trench, inside a besieged Fortress America, and sharing your America-centered nationalist view of the world.

IF you are aware that some non-Americans forum members exist here, do you regard them as foreigners who are peripheral to the discussion? Apparently we are not included in your definition of "us" when you post here.
Click to expand...


Well, it is a fact that the USA is the most important nation in the known universe.
 
Seismosaurus said:
The types of people who think it would martyr them all and send them off to heaven, whilst dealing a crippling blow against a country they hate. The 9/11 hijacker mentality, essentially.
Click to expand...

That doesn't counter MAD. Being a Jihadi only works for the person dying in battle, IIRC, not if your whole country is wiped out in a retaliation strike.
 
Seismosaurus said:
The types of people who think it would martyr them all and send them off to heaven, whilst dealing a crippling blow against a country they hate. The 9/11 hijacker mentality, essentially.
Click to expand...

Which country is ruled by those with those a "9/11 hijacker mentality"?

What makes you think the 9/11 hijackers wanted to kill a million Americans along with the millions of Muslims which America, as the only country is the world to have shown it is happy to use nuclear weapons against civilians, would kill in retaliation?
 
JihadJane said:
Which country is ruled by those with those a "9/11 hijacker mentality"?
Click to expand...
I didn't say one was. I said that sane leaders were "not necessarily a given with Iran, and much less a given for the kinds of people that Iran might, possibly, give nukes to if they had them", and that whilst "we can argue about just how much the leaders buy into that stuff", in a country like Iran "one true believer certainly has a decent chance of getting in front of the red button eventually."

What makes you think the 9/11 hijackers wanted to kill a million Americans along with the millions of Muslims
Click to expand...
I think it's obvious that they wanted to do as much damage to America as they possibly could. If they had the ability to kill millions then, they would certainly have done so.

And it's also obvious that the suicide bomber mentality is willing to sacrifice both themselves and innocents to achieve their goals. Themselves because, well, that's exactly what they did on 9/11. Others because that's also exactly what they did on 9/11. They didn't carefully target "enemies" only the way western forces try to, after all. They just killed a whopping big number of people, knowing full well that some would be innocent muslim believers even by their own standards.

Setting a nuke off in the US would simply be more of the same on a bigger scale. Do I think that the Iranian leaders of dreaming of the day when they can sacrifice themselves and their nation to kill millions of Americans? Of course not, don't be silly. Do I think it's possible that a present or future leader of Iran might decide it's worthwhile to do so, or give nukes to somebody who will? Of course it's possible.

which America, as the only country is the world to have shown it is happy to use nuclear weapons against civilians, would kill in retaliation?
Click to expand...
Wow, talk about irrelevances.
 
Something tells me it isn't really necessary to explain the 7th Imam jihad mentality to...uh..."JihadJane".
 
How ironic would that be, using their own missiles against them?

But I assume they've thought of that already......
 
I'm sure they've thought about it, but there's really nothing they could do to stop it.
 
Seismosaurus said:
I'm sure they've thought about it, but there's really nothing they could do to stop it.
Click to expand...

From what I heard from a US Navy sailor, their ASW is kinda ******. Just a sub could cripple the USA with a few strikes at key locations (and vice versa, that´s the whole MAD thing).

Fun fact, you guys know of the Russian deadman´s switch? Basically if Moscow goes up in flames, ALL their nukes fly automatically. It´s an automatic response system.
 
Last edited:
Johny2x4 said:
Doubt the americans could do a thing. From what I heard from a US Navy sailor, their ASW is kinda ******. Just a sub could cripple the USA with a few strikes at key locations (and vice versa, that the whole MAD thing).

Fun fact, you guys know of the Russian deadman´s switch? Basically if Moscow goes up in flames, ALL their nukes fly automatically. It´s an automatic response system.
Click to expand...

Johnny, how much ASW you done in your lifetime? I am gonna guess that you are talking outta yer backside.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom