>The odds of a global nuclear conflict are hopefully not in the double digit percentages, but I can't see why they aren't at a historic high in history. It's n

>The odds of a global nuclear conflict are hopefully not in the double digit percentages, but I can't see why they aren't at a historic high in history. It's not even close. There are many precedents for nuclear powers fighting each other directly without triggering a nuclear war. For instance: - The Korean War. It wasn't a proxy war, Western troops were directly fighting Chinese soldiers and the Soviet air force. - The Sino-Soviet border conflict in 1969. Two nuclear powers fighting each other directly on their own soil. - Indo-Pakistani conflicts. Both have nuclear weapons and they fight each other on their own soil. - Indo-Chinese conflicts. I'm not advocating for it, but I'm fairly certain that even a direct NATO intervention in Ukraine wouldn't lead to a nuclear war. Hell, Putin might even welcome it, it would give him a good excuse for the poor performance of his troops.