Is nuclear war inevitable?

[Damocles]

No.

And we've had this conversation recently in another thread but there's no event anymore outside of a supernova for our Sun which won't happen for over a billion years that can now wipe out humanity realistically. We're far too widespread, far too adaptive and far too organised for any event to completely kill the species. People say "oh we'll wipe ourselves out" as some sort of weird cliche without actually thinking about what they are saying or proposing there. In 30 years time when we have permanent colonies on Mars it will be literally impossible to wipe out humanity outside of a supernova.

Also, I'm not sure if people understand what damage nuclear weapons do. Given the top of the range ICBM hit the Etihad, the 100% kill range would only extend to the Museum of Science and Industry. Some windows would break at Old Trafford and you'd get radiation burns of some level out to about Urmston. It would kill probably millions of people but nowhere near enough for extinction of the species even IF nuclear winter holds true.

Are you saying a huge asteroid strike wouldn't wipe us out?

Yes, a huge asteroid strike couldn't wipe us out. Anything big enough for that will be seen long before and we could manage it.

And to jots, I was talking about a MIRV surface strike all landing in the same point not a single air strike. Or rather, the damage that would be caused by the additive yield of all warheads in a MIRV if hit in a single ground strike.

I think many people overestimate the damage nuclear weapons have. Would take hundreds or perhaps thousands of the current ICBMs to wipe out the UK alone let alone the restof the species.

 

[whp.blue]

No.

And we've had this conversation recently in another thread but there's no event anymore outside of a supernova for our Sun which won't happen for over a billion years that can now wipe out humanity realistically. We're far too widespread, far too adaptive and far too organised for any event to completely kill the species. People say "oh we'll wipe ourselves out" as some sort of weird cliche without actually thinking about what they are saying or proposing there. In 30 years time when we have permanent colonies on Mars it will be literally impossible to wipe out humanity outside of a supernova.

Also, I'm not sure if people understand what damage nuclear weapons do. Given the top of the range ICBM hit the Etihad, the 100% kill range would only extend to the Museum of Science and Industry. Some windows would break at Old Trafford and you'd get radiation burns of some level out to about Urmston. It would kill probably millions of people but nowhere near enough for extinction of the species even IF nuclear winter holds true.

Are you saying a huge asteroid strike wouldn't wipe us out?

Yes, a huge asteroid strike couldn't wipe us out. Anything big enough for that will be seen long before and we could manage it.

And to jots, I was talking about a MIRV surface strike all landing in the same point not a single air strike. Or rather, the damage that would be caused by the additive yield of all warheads in a MIRV if hit in a single ground strike.

I think many people overestimate the damage nuclear weapons have. Would take hundreds or perhaps thousands of the current ICBMs to wipe out the UK alone let alone the restof the species.

I was always under the impression that in the event of an all out nuclear war the actual explosive force of the bombs was only the first phase of the possible extinction and the fall out radiation and the potential nuclear winter would be the real planet killer

 

[DelToro]

Are you saying a huge asteroid strike wouldn't wipe us out?

Yes, a huge asteroid strike couldn't wipe us out. Anything big enough for that will be seen long before and we could manage it.

And to jots, I was talking about a MIRV surface strike all landing in the same point not a single air strike. Or rather, the damage that would be caused by the additive yield of all warheads in a MIRV if hit in a single ground strike.

I think many people overestimate the damage nuclear weapons have. Would take hundreds or perhaps thousands of the current ICBMs to wipe out the UK alone let alone the restof the species.

I was always under the impression that in the event of an all out nuclear war the actual explosive force of the bombs was only the first phase of the possible extinction and the fall out radiation and the potential nuclear winter would be the planet killer and

.......and what?

You've left a bit of a cliffhanger there Damocles.

 

[whp.blue]

Yes, a huge asteroid strike couldn't wipe us out. Anything big enough for that will be seen long before and we could manage it.

And to jots, I was talking about a MIRV surface strike all landing in the same point not a single air strike. Or rather, the damage that would be caused by the additive yield of all warheads in a MIRV if hit in a single ground strike.

I think many people overestimate the damage nuclear weapons have. Would take hundreds or perhaps thousands of the current ICBMs to wipe out the UK alone let alone the restof the species.

I was always under the impression that in the event of an all out nuclear war the actual explosive force of the bombs was only the first phase of the possible extinction and the fall out radiation and the potential nuclear winter would be the planet killer and

.......and what?

You've left a bit of a cliffhanger there Damocles.

That extraneous and was mine now edited out sorry

 

[DelToro]

I was always under the impression that in the event of an all out nuclear war the actual explosive force of the bombs was only the first phase of the possible extinction and the fall out radiation and the potential nuclear winter would be the planet killer and

.......and what?

You've left a bit of a cliffhanger there Damocles.

That extraneous and was mine now edited out sorry

So there's nothing after "planet killer"?

What a bummer.

 

[Moriati]

Looks like the US seem hell bent on it - aided and abetted by the EU. A peace agreement is reached, what does cast iron Dave do ? What does congress do ?
Yesterday, in a vote that largely slid under the radar, the House of Representatives passed a resolution urging Obama to send lethal aid to Ukraine, providing offensive, not just “defensive” weapons to the Ukraine army – the same insolvent, hyperinflating Ukraine which, with a Caa3/CC credit rating.....
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-03-24/us-house-votes-348-48-arm-ukraine-russia-warns-lethal-aid-will-explode-whole-situati" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-03-2 ... le-situati</a>

A Resolution, "Calling on the President to provide Ukraine with military assistance to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity," stealthily made its way to the House Floor today without having been debated in the relevant House Committees and without even being given a bill number before appearing on the Floor!

Now titled H. Res. 162, the bill demands that President Obama send lethal military equipment to the US-backed government in Kiev and makes it clear that the weapons are to be used to take military action to return Crimea and parts of eastern Ukraine to Kiev's rule.

Congress wants a war in Ukraine and will not settle for a ceasefire!

I say don't poke the bear.





The real world effect of this Resolution must be made clear: The US Congress is giving Kiev the green light to begin a war with Russia, with the implicit guarantee of US backing. This is moral hazard on steroids and could well spark World War III.
<a class="postlink" href="http://defence-blog.com/?p=4404" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://defence-blog.com/?p=4404</a>

 

[whp.blue]

.......and what?

You've left a bit of a cliffhanger there Damocles.

That extraneous and was mine now edited out sorry

So there's nothing after "planet killer"?

What a bummer.

A full stop may have been pertinent.

 

[TCIB]

Looks like the US seem hell bent on it - aided and abetted by the EU. A peace agreement is reached, what does cast iron Dave do ? What does congress do ?
Yesterday, in a vote that largely slid under the radar, the House of Representatives passed a resolution urging Obama to send lethal aid to Ukraine, providing offensive, not just “defensive” weapons to the Ukraine army – the same insolvent, hyperinflating Ukraine which, with a Caa3/CC credit rating.....
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-03-24/us-house-votes-348-48-arm-ukraine-russia-warns-lethal-aid-will-explode-whole-situati" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-03-2 ... le-situati</a>

A Resolution, "Calling on the President to provide Ukraine with military assistance to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity," stealthily made its way to the House Floor today without having been debated in the relevant House Committees and without even being given a bill number before appearing on the Floor!

Now titled H. Res. 162, the bill demands that President Obama send lethal military equipment to the US-backed government in Kiev and makes it clear that the weapons are to be used to take military action to return Crimea and parts of eastern Ukraine to Kiev's rule.

Congress wants a war in Ukraine and will not settle for a ceasefire!

I say don't poke the bear.





The real world effect of this Resolution must be made clear: The US Congress is giving Kiev the green light to begin a war with Russia, with the implicit guarantee of US backing. This is moral hazard on steroids and could well spark World War III.
<a class="postlink" href="http://defence-blog.com/?p=4404" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://defence-blog.com/?p=4404</a>

I better get my fucking "coffee" on saturday before i get a nuke down my bleeding throat then.

 

[Damocles]

Are you saying a huge asteroid strike wouldn't wipe us out?

Yes, a huge asteroid strike couldn't wipe us out. Anything big enough for that will be seen long before and we could manage it.

And to jots, I was talking about a MIRV surface strike all landing in the same point not a single air strike. Or rather, the damage that would be caused by the additive yield of all warheads in a MIRV if hit in a single ground strike.

I think many people overestimate the damage nuclear weapons have. Would take hundreds or perhaps thousands of the current ICBMs to wipe out the UK alone let alone the restof the species.

I was always under the impression that in the event of an all out nuclear war the actual explosive force of the bombs was only the first phase of the possible extinction and the fall out radiation and the potential nuclear winter would be the real planet killer

Fall out is so hard to model properly as it is based on hundreds of variables from wind speed to fhow the reaction itself works to detonation height and a bunch of other things. The general idea from the type of people who seem to spend their lives modelling this is that although keen amateurs can't estimate potential deaths accurately, we are talking thousands rather than millions, obviously depending on the target.

Nuclear Winter might not even exist from a consequence of a nuclear war. There are arguments on both sides that are compelling and it isn't settled as an issue. Most agree however that any nuclear war where only metropolitan citys are targeted using current generation ICBMs shouldn't produce one due to a lack of a firestorm after impact.

 

[BlueBearBoots]

Yes, a huge asteroid strike couldn't wipe us out. Anything big enough for that will be seen long before and we could manage it.

And to jots, I was talking about a MIRV surface strike all landing in the same point not a single air strike. Or rather, the damage that would be caused by the additive yield of all warheads in a MIRV if hit in a single ground strike.

I think many people overestimate the damage nuclear weapons have. Would take hundreds or perhaps thousands of the current ICBMs to wipe out the UK alone let alone the restof the species.

I was always under the impression that in the event of an all out nuclear war the actual explosive force of the bombs was only the first phase of the possible extinction and the fall out radiation and the potential nuclear winter would be the real planet killer

Fall out is so hard to model properly as it is based on hundreds of variables from wind speed to fhow the reaction itself works to detonation height and a bunch of other things. The general idea from the type of people who seem to spend their lives modelling this is that although keen amateurs can't estimate potential deaths accurately, we are talking thousands rather than millions, obviously depending on the target.

Nuclear Winter might not even exist from a consequence of a nuclear war. There are arguments on both sides that are compelling and it isn't settled as an issue. Most agree however that any nuclear war where only metropolitan citys are targeted using current generation ICBMs shouldn't produce one due to a lack of a firestorm after impact.

Phew Threads the film has given me nightmares for years