3 ms·
Why do you think it would escalate? Do you have a crystal ball? I don't know anything about anything, but there have been many regional conflicts over the last
by benji-york 4y ago
Why do you think it would escalate? Do you have a crystal ball?
I don't know anything about anything, but there have been many regional conflicts over the last 100 years that have remained regional. I don't see how the technology used to fight those regional conflicts changes anything.
Perhaps the social connotations of those technologies is significant enough that using some rather than others is "triggering" enough that non-combatants can't help but get involved. <shrug>
- reflexco 4y agoNuclear weapon use in a local conflict would be similar to someone unleashing a new coronavirus to win a local conflict. Due to its polluting non-local effects, it instantly paints a target on whoever uses it. This is also why "anonymous" terrorist nuclear bomb use would be very problematic.
- benji-york 4y ago> polluting non-local effects I agree that these exist. I do not believe that they are as significant as the general public believes. After all, there have been more than 500 nuclear weapons detonated world-wide in the open atmosphere. [0] If these non-local effects are very large, why would we take Russia's threats of using nuclear weapons against a neighbor as credible? [0]: https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/nucleartesttally https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/nucleartesttally
- objectivetruth 4y ago
- ekianjo 4y ago> Why do you think it would escalate? Do you have a crystal ball? Even if the chance is tiny, you don't want to risk a nuclear conflict because there is no going back to the world that we live in after that. I am always dumbfounded at the lack of awareness that having a direct conflict with a nuclear power increases the risk of nuclear war.