3 ms·
The majority of world's population lives in areas that wouldn't even be targeted in an all-out NATO-vs-Russia exchange. Noone is going to bomb South America, Af
by PeterisP 4y ago
The majority of world's population lives in areas that wouldn't even be targeted in an all-out NATO-vs-Russia exchange. Noone is going to bomb South America, Africa, or most of Asia, so even if everyone in "participating" countries would die (which far from being true), you'd still need most of the current food demand. And the supplies of food generally flow out of the affected countries, the industrialized regions feed the developing regions with staple crops (receiving in return imports of "optional" food like coffee, cocoa and bananas) - case in point, the ongoing events about grain supply from Ukraine (and also Russia) to Africa and Middle East.
- Retric 4y agoA limited exchange between a subset of current nuclear powers is even less deadly. If we assume China, India, and Pakistan, who all have nukes, don’t participate then the worlds economy might not collapse. Similarly an exchange between India and Pakistan would only disrupt most of the world if it involved salted nukes or similar horrors. On the other hand WWII involved most of South America, Africa, and Asia to some degree. If WWIII got similarly out of hand then nukes might take out all of the worlds chip making capacity, oil refineries, and deep sea ports as strategic assets making thing far more unpleasant.