3 ms·

Oh, I think that nuclear activity is at least as, if not moreso, likely than it was back then. But IMO it's much less likely for it to be a full scale, global t

by jghn 12y ago

Oh, I think that nuclear activity is at least as, if not moreso, likely than it was back then. But IMO it's much less likely for it to be a full scale, global thermonuclear war (to borrow a phrase). I just don't see people living in fear that any day might be the day that the entire world ceases to exist as we know it. For instance, I'm guessing that grade schoolers don't have a nuclear attack drill (which were laughable, now that I think back). Personally I fall into that camp, but if I woke up one morning to find out that some large city had a nuclear device go off in it via a terrorist attack, or (purely an example) Israel dropped a bomb somewhere in Iran, I wouldn't be surprised at all.

escapologybb 12y ago
I agree with you 100% that the likelihood of global thermonuclear war has decreased, I definitely think it's going to be a small scale incident when it happens. If there is any such thing as a small-scale nuclear event. But yes, I don't think anybody would be surprised if there was a limited exchange between Iran and Israel one day. Or maybe a container ship containing a nuke goes off in a harbour somewhere in a terrorist attack, we'd be horrified, but not surprised. The thing that struck me as a kid was the mental image of two groups of generals and leaders sitting over a map, one in Downing Street and the other in the Kremlin. I always wondered why they didn't just play Diplomacy[0] instead, but play for real countries instead of the imaginary ones in the boardgame. They still get to do all the scheming, backstabbing and other diplomatic shenanigans that politicians seem to love but without the loss of life and destruction. Not sure my idea would gain traction these days though! [0]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diplomacy_(game) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diplomacy_(game)
- TeMPOraL 12y ago
  > I always wondered why they didn't just play Diplomacy[0] instead, but play for real countries instead of the imaginary ones in the boardgame. They still get to do all the scheming, backstabbing and other diplomatic shenanigans that politicians seem to love but without the loss of life and destruction. The reason is, of course, the metagame. The first one to drop a real H-bomb on the other or launch a real assault would win, hence both sides need to play at the least simulated level available. Also, you have just reminded me of ST:TOS episode "A Taste of Armageddon", where two planets fought a virtual war in which computers simulated the mutual bombing and after such fire exchange a computed number of people were euthanized.
kirsebaer 12y ago
The documentary "Countdown to Zero" (2010) convinced me it's only a matter of time before an improvised nuclear weapon is used in a city somewhere. Scary to hear how easy it is to buy nuclear material.

by jghn 12y ago

escapologybb 12y ago

I agree with you 100% that the likelihood of global thermonuclear war has decreased, I definitely think it's going to be a small scale incident when it happens. If there is any such thing as a small-scale nuclear event. But yes, I don't think anybody would be surprised if there was a limited exchange between Iran and Israel one day. Or maybe a container ship containing a nuke goes off in a harbour somewhere in a terrorist attack, we'd be horrified, but not surprised. The thing that struck me as a kid was the mental image of two groups of generals and leaders sitting over a map, one in Downing Street and the other in the Kremlin. I always wondered why they didn't just play Diplomacy[0] instead, but play for real countries instead of the imaginary ones in the boardgame. They still get to do all the scheming, backstabbing and other diplomatic shenanigans that politicians seem to love but without the loss of life and destruction. Not sure my idea would gain traction these days though! [0]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diplomacy_(game) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diplomacy_(game)

TeMPOraL 12y ago
> I always wondered why they didn't just play Diplomacy[0] instead, but play for real countries instead of the imaginary ones in the boardgame. They still get to do all the scheming, backstabbing and other diplomatic shenanigans that politicians seem to love but without the loss of life and destruction. The reason is, of course, the metagame. The first one to drop a real H-bomb on the other or launch a real assault would win, hence both sides need to play at the least simulated level available. Also, you have just reminded me of ST:TOS episode "A Taste of Armageddon", where two planets fought a virtual war in which computers simulated the mutual bombing and after such fire exchange a computed number of people were euthanized.

kirsebaer 12y ago

The documentary "Countdown to Zero" (2010) convinced me it's only a matter of time before an improvised nuclear weapon is used in a city somewhere. Scary to hear how easy it is to buy nuclear material.