World war three
Discussion
Wacky Racer said:
Question:-
Do you think World war three, or at least a massive exchange of nuclear weapons will start in your lifetime?
I am not filled with optimism personally.
Oh please... go back 20-30-40 years, the clock was much closer to midnight than it is at the moment, and nothing happened then. The outlook was really, really poor at times too, like the time around the Cuban Missile Crisis - and there's nothing like this threat now, and I can't see anything like this happenning any day soon either.Do you think World war three, or at least a massive exchange of nuclear weapons will start in your lifetime?
I am not filled with optimism personally.
prand said:
Oh please... go back 20-30-40 years, the clock was much closer to midnight than it is at the moment, and nothing happened then. The outlook was really, really poor at times too, like the time around the Cuban Missile Crisis - and there's nothing like this threat now, and I can't see anything like this happenning any day soon either.
If the Soviet cargo ships had not turned round when they did, we were probably a matter of hours away from armageddon, given the deep mistrust at the time.I would say it is a lot more dangerous now because many more unstable countries have the bomb than way back in 1962.
I obviously hope you are right....
wolves_wanderer said:
I am convinced that a nuclear weapon will be used in anger somewhere in the world during my life. I don't think that there will be a 3rd world war in that time (or ever if I'm honest.)
Depends where and what you read, but some people say tactical nuclear weapons have been used by Russia in Chechnya and America in Afghanistan...Me, I dunno.
TTwiggy said:
MiseryStreak said:
You should be filled with optimism, it will happen. I think it's about time the cockroaches got their turn, until then we should carry on trying our damnedest to f
k the place up as much as possible.
Well I for one welcome our insect overlords.k the place up as much as possible. excellentRe other comments, I think I would prefer to croak quickly rather than slowly in a stinking basement with a bunch of gum-bleeders trying to get me last tin o' beans. Also agree with others here with ref to the remarkable ability of humans to pull back from the precipice.
Edited by Blackpuddin on Wednesday 18th April 16:07
vixen1700 said:
Depends where and what you read, but some people say tactical nuclear weapons have been used by Russia in Chechnya and America in Afghanistan...
Me, I dunno.
No way, no how. Nuke detonations are effectively impossible to hide and there would have been a massive international uproar.Me, I dunno.
Personally I think that it's extremely likely that a nuclear weapon will be detonate in anger, in my lifetime. Either in a city somewhere as part of a 'terrorist' plot, likely secretly supported by a nation state, or lobbed at some invading force as the last gasp of a dying government. I do think it's extremely unlikely that we'll see the sort of massive exchange of ICBM's that will effectively end the world as was planned during the cold war.
Zaxxon said:
I don't think there will be a massive world nuclear war, but I do think it is a possibility that Iran and maybe N Korea may involve nuclear weapons at some stage.
But trying to predict this kind of thing is like trying to guess the lottery numbers.
It could reasonably be argued that the sooner they get actual working nuclear weapons, the better.But trying to predict this kind of thing is like trying to guess the lottery numbers.
http://homepage.mac.com/msb/163x/faqs/nuclear_warf...
that link up there said:
Its interesting to note that mad, homicidal aggressive dictators tend to get very tame sane cautious ones as soon as they split atoms. Whatever their motivations and intents, the mechanics of how nuclear weapons work dictate that mad dictators become sane dictators very quickly. After all its not much fun dictating if one's country is a radioactive trash pile and you're one of the ashes. China, India and Pakistan are good examples. One of the best examples of this process at work is Mao Tse Tung. Throughout the 1950s he was extraordinarily bellicose and repeatedly tried to bully, cajole or trick Khruschev and his successors into initiating a nuclear exchange with the US on the grounds that world communism would rise from the ashes. Thats what Quemoy and Matsu were all about in the late 1950s. Then China got nuclear weapons. Have you noticed how reticent they are with them? Its sunk in. They can be totally destroyed; will be totally destroyed; in the event of an exchange. A Chinese Officer here once on exchange (billed as a "look what we can do" session it was really a "look what we can do to you" exercise) produced the standard line about how the Chinese could lose 500 million people in a nuclear war and keep going with the survivors. So his hosts got out a demographic map (one that shows population densities rather than topographical data) and got to work with pie-cutters using a few classified tricks - and got virtually the entire population of China using only a small proportion of the US arsenal. The guest stared at the map for a couple of minutes then went and tossed his cookies into the toilet bowl. The only people who mouth off about using nuclear weapons and threaten others with them are those that do not have keys hanging around their necks. The moment they get keys and realize what they've let themselves in for, they get to be very quiet and very cautious indeed.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff