5 ms·
Please, please DO NOT test a nuclear weapon. The world will be far better off if everyones nuclear weapon turned out to be a dud.
by sumanthvepa 7y ago
Please, please DO NOT test a nuclear weapon. The world will be far better off if everyones nuclear weapon turned out to be a dud.
- DennisP 7y agoTrue, but if just one side's nuclear weapons are actually duds, and the other side figures that out, that's not such a great situation.
- sumanthvepa 7y agoI know. I know. But imagine the comedy of epic proportions that would ensue if WW3 consisted of all sides desperately pushing the big red button and nothing happens!
- tw04 7y agoYes, that would be hilarious. Instead of half of the worlds population being wiped out by nukes, we'd be wiped out by chemical weapons, airstrikes, and ground warfare.
- ClumsyPilot 7y agoAlternative scenario: The imbeciles are lynched in the street by angry crowds, many enquiries follow, life continues as normal. I know anyone alive today, not suffering from a mental illness, that would accept their leaders starting a global nuclear war.
- tw04 7y agoI would wager roughly 49% of the American voting public would be fine with Trump starting a Nuclear war. They didn't bat an eye at him assassinating an Iranian general. Or praising leaders like Kim in North Korea. They don't mind his rampant corruption to date or abuses of power. Mind you, that's not a majority of the actual population given how low voter turnout is, but that's enough to be really scary.
- ClumsyPilot 7y agoI think the number is far too high, in my experience partisan people sober up remarkably quickly once their ass is on the line.
- DennisP 7y agoNone of those are anywhere near as destructive as thermonuclear weapons.
- vollmond 7y agoWhat if that's already happened?
- throwaway8879 7y agoNukes may shorten an otherwise prolonged war. "Better off" is obviously very subjective, but I don't see how nukes aren't better off if they end up saving lives. Let's also consider all the direct wars avoided in the last ~75 years, an outcome of nuclear MAD. The reality of our situation if that we will keep fighting each other, that's a given. Best to test our nukes to make sure they work. Nukes that won't work can't save lives.
- sumanthvepa 7y agoMAD is indeed an equilibrium. But it is an unstable one. That is the problem. So far the US-USSR/Russia detante has worked, but it might not work in other situations. India and Pakistan are a case in point. They have fought at least two limited conflicts (the most recent one being last year,) despite being declared nuclear weapons powers. The possibility of catastrophic miscalculation in the fog of war is very, very real.