4 ms·
Nuclear bombs aren't that dangerous though... in the grand scheme of things. That's because their use could trigger a chain reaction which creates a virtual ap
by swalsh 12y ago
Nuclear bombs aren't that dangerous though... in the grand scheme of things. That's because their use could trigger a chain reaction which creates a virtual apocalypse scenario. Basically ensuring their use impossible.
What's scary is a weapon that can cause massive damage, that we are actually willing to use.
- FiatLuxDave 12y agoIn the grand scheme of things, the situation that held during the Cold War was a historical accident. Not every nuclear bomb in the future will necessarily be possessed by nations who are facing adversaries who can respond in kind to the use of nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons are very scary indeed, and we are very lucky to have made it decades since they have last been used in war. I have good faith that we will make it to a century, but I would not make a bet that they will never, ever be used in anger ever again.
- Chronic29 12y agoI, however, would make the bet that they never ever are used again.
- rdl 12y agoI think MAD between a small number of (mostly rational) actors was the best case scenario. Sure, nuclear states vs. non-nuclear traditional states is the most likely use right now, but we're not that far off from non-state actors being able to make nuclear weapons. Right now the only real protection is limiting access to fissile material.
- erkkie 12y agoWhat's worse, it's gonna soon be trivial for non-state actors to do similar (or worse) damage via bio. Fun times ahead.
- alex_anglin 12y agoWith respect to nuclear weapons, the question isn't just with their use but also their misuse. There have been a non-zero amount of incidents in North America with non-nuclear detonations (fortunately). Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_nuclear_accidents#1950s https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_nuclear_accid...