What about false alarms?
Say a machine transmits false launch data and POTUS needs to have a finger on the trigger just to be ready.
Or maybe a hostile force will kidnap this person and leave the US nuclearly powerless.
I'm content enough with Mutually Assured Destruction and detterence theory without adding in any more moving parts.
It's really amazing to me how many people still whine and moan about our nuclear weapons and how we are such bad people and our president (whoever it is) is a mass murderer, or we're arguing about who we would or wouldn't want to have their finger on the trigger.
When in hell have we ever launched a nuclear missile?
When in hell are we ever likely to launch a nuclear missile?
How is this shit relevant?
I believe he said this in the cold war era, someone correct me if I am wrong, and the threat of nuclear was very real. Also, the fact that such weapons exist is quite frightening, regardless of if they are going to be used or not.
Also, same guest here, the atomic bombs killed 220,000 innocent civilians directly and thousands more due to radiation. Regardless of if you think the bombs were necessary or not, that is a huge number of civilian casualties. Also, General MacArthur was quite gung ho about wanting to drop atomic weapons in Korea during the Korean War, which would have lead to thousands of more civilian deaths. A nuclear weapon would be unimaginable. This was a long comment but Im just saying that the US has killed many with a super intense weapon before and has come quite close to doing it again so its not entirely impossible. Also, its just good to learn history so we never repeat it cuz that happens a lot.
Yes, but, we are no more likely to use nuclear weapons at this point in time than we are to all unite behind Trump.
Since the height of tensions in the mid-eighties, they are really nothing more than a condom in a teenager's wallet; looks cool to your friends, but it ain't never gonna be used in anger.
And as far as such weapons being so frightening, why? All a nuclear explosion is is an explosion. A big one, but really no different than using lots of regular bombs. If you want to be frightened of something, be frightened of the lone jihadi with a half pound of C4 under his jacket, or the Chinese computer hacker that can wipe out your entire life with a couple keystrokes.
▼
deleted
· 8 years ago
Guest who? How exactly do you compare a nuclear explosion to a half pound of C4? please just research the nuclear weapon and the effects of nuclear radiation.... Then the estimated magnitude of of a nuclear bomb.... Then consider the retaliation....
Tell me, which is a more common event: a nation deploying nuclear weapons, or a jihadi blowing himself and everyone around him to hell?
Humanity is scared of nuclear weapons. That's why detterence works.
A much more realistic threat would come from common criminals and terrorists.
deleted
· 8 years ago
"How is a nuclear explosion different from multiple bombs"
Omfg please stop.
Small, controlled bombs are used to target small, specific areas where your target is, so you reduce the casualities to a minimum. A nuclear head (or anything similar) is just destroying everything in it's way, which by chance will also destroy the target. It's like puttimg little traps for mice around your house or setting your house on fire. Both will get the job done but which one is the answer?
"How exactly do you compare a nuclear explosion to a half pound of C4?" I didn't Kitty. I compared likely scenarios. Suicide bombers and computer hackers attack nearly every day, nuclear weapons have been used twice in history.
And, my dear, I have researched nuclear weapons; I'm a history buff. Check your history books for the results of carpet bombing in conventional warfare. Much of Europe looked a lot like Hiroshima when WWII ended. The magnitude of a nuclear bomb is no greater, in practical use, than the thousands of "regular" bombs that were dropped.
And the effects of radiation? Talk to a OIF/OEF vet about the ill effects of biological and even conventional warfare they encountered. Research Gulf War Syndrome.
For that matter you are more likely to encounter West Nile, Zika, or flesh eating bacteria than nuclear radiation.
All I'm saying is that there are much more realistic things to be worried about than the very unlikely use of nuclear weapons.
1
·
Edited 8 years ago
deleted
· 8 years ago
I was comparing it to selective bombing, not carpet bombing, because that isn't designed to be precise.
And anyways, carpet bombing is still nothing compared to a nuclear launch or an H bomb.
Yes, they are now used as a "preventive" card. People are scared of you so war does not even start. But there will be a time when fear won't be enough. A war will begin and as soon as one nation uses the big guns, everyone else will. And if you are as informed as you claim to be, there is no need for me to explain the outcome of that posibility.
I know. I was comparing the reality of war - you bomb the shit out of the enemy. Europe looked as bad as Japan when we were done.
It's just that we haven't used a nuclear weapon for 70 years, the cold war and its related fears are over, and no one seems to be taking Iran or North Korea seriously, so why worry about something that will probably never be used again?
IF there is ever a nuclear attack it will likely be a small-scale terrorist bombing, not a nation we could unleash hell on anyway.
deleted
· 8 years ago
There has been some moral improvements over the years on the matter of war, one of them being trying to target only the military, not civilians. While there are still collateral deaths, it's nowhere near what it used to be.
No one is taking Iran or NK seriously because the most powerful nations already has nuclear capabilities, and they can strike before or at the same time with equal or more power.
Also, i can't see how you "small-scale bombing" and "nuclear attack" can be on the same sentence.
On the matter of terrorists, it's not really a war. Not a conventional one, anyways. Which is worse for the defensive side since you can't target them as they do. And if they get that kind of power, i can't imagine how you are relaxed about jt
"Also, i can't see how you "small-scale bombing" and "nuclear attack" can be on the same sentence." Because in my terrorist scenario it would be a SMALL device, probably in a backpack with the capability of maybe a few city blocks. However, a terrorist device would more likely be a "dirty" bomb, releasing more radiation than explosive power.
"No one is taking Iran or NK seriously because the most powerful nations already has nuclear capabilities, and they can strike before or at the same time with equal or more power." Neither country really has the balls to match their bluster, but either could very well sponsor a terrorist attack behind the scenes. I believe we should take them, and Russia, more seriously.
"And if they get that kind of power, i can't imagine how you are relaxed about jt." When and IF there is a credible threat I certainly won't be relaxed about it since I doubt our government's capacity to defend us from such a threat.
At this point in time, however, I see too many more clear and present dangers than nuclear annihilation. Even the terrorists are far less likely to ever get a nuclear device than they are to get biological weapons, technological weapons, or even box cutters.
You can't spend your life fretting about the what-ifs that are beyond your control. My philosophy is life's a game of Russian roulette and sooner or later we will all drop the hammer on a live round. Just live life, be a good person and a great friend, maybe do something crazy once in a while, and don't worry about stuff until it happens. Live until you die.
Say a machine transmits false launch data and POTUS needs to have a finger on the trigger just to be ready.
Or maybe a hostile force will kidnap this person and leave the US nuclearly powerless.
I'm content enough with Mutually Assured Destruction and detterence theory without adding in any more moving parts.
When in hell have we ever launched a nuclear missile?
When in hell are we ever likely to launch a nuclear missile?
How is this shit relevant?
Since the height of tensions in the mid-eighties, they are really nothing more than a condom in a teenager's wallet; looks cool to your friends, but it ain't never gonna be used in anger.
And as far as such weapons being so frightening, why? All a nuclear explosion is is an explosion. A big one, but really no different than using lots of regular bombs. If you want to be frightened of something, be frightened of the lone jihadi with a half pound of C4 under his jacket, or the Chinese computer hacker that can wipe out your entire life with a couple keystrokes.
Humanity is scared of nuclear weapons. That's why detterence works.
A much more realistic threat would come from common criminals and terrorists.
Omfg please stop.
Small, controlled bombs are used to target small, specific areas where your target is, so you reduce the casualities to a minimum. A nuclear head (or anything similar) is just destroying everything in it's way, which by chance will also destroy the target. It's like puttimg little traps for mice around your house or setting your house on fire. Both will get the job done but which one is the answer?
And, my dear, I have researched nuclear weapons; I'm a history buff. Check your history books for the results of carpet bombing in conventional warfare. Much of Europe looked a lot like Hiroshima when WWII ended. The magnitude of a nuclear bomb is no greater, in practical use, than the thousands of "regular" bombs that were dropped.
And the effects of radiation? Talk to a OIF/OEF vet about the ill effects of biological and even conventional warfare they encountered. Research Gulf War Syndrome.
For that matter you are more likely to encounter West Nile, Zika, or flesh eating bacteria than nuclear radiation.
All I'm saying is that there are much more realistic things to be worried about than the very unlikely use of nuclear weapons.
And anyways, carpet bombing is still nothing compared to a nuclear launch or an H bomb.
Yes, they are now used as a "preventive" card. People are scared of you so war does not even start. But there will be a time when fear won't be enough. A war will begin and as soon as one nation uses the big guns, everyone else will. And if you are as informed as you claim to be, there is no need for me to explain the outcome of that posibility.
It's just that we haven't used a nuclear weapon for 70 years, the cold war and its related fears are over, and no one seems to be taking Iran or North Korea seriously, so why worry about something that will probably never be used again?
IF there is ever a nuclear attack it will likely be a small-scale terrorist bombing, not a nation we could unleash hell on anyway.
No one is taking Iran or NK seriously because the most powerful nations already has nuclear capabilities, and they can strike before or at the same time with equal or more power.
Also, i can't see how you "small-scale bombing" and "nuclear attack" can be on the same sentence.
On the matter of terrorists, it's not really a war. Not a conventional one, anyways. Which is worse for the defensive side since you can't target them as they do. And if they get that kind of power, i can't imagine how you are relaxed about jt
"No one is taking Iran or NK seriously because the most powerful nations already has nuclear capabilities, and they can strike before or at the same time with equal or more power." Neither country really has the balls to match their bluster, but either could very well sponsor a terrorist attack behind the scenes. I believe we should take them, and Russia, more seriously.
"And if they get that kind of power, i can't imagine how you are relaxed about jt." When and IF there is a credible threat I certainly won't be relaxed about it since I doubt our government's capacity to defend us from such a threat.
You can't spend your life fretting about the what-ifs that are beyond your control. My philosophy is life's a game of Russian roulette and sooner or later we will all drop the hammer on a live round. Just live life, be a good person and a great friend, maybe do something crazy once in a while, and don't worry about stuff until it happens. Live until you die.