NationStates Jolt Archive

CND- what do you guys think?

I'm all for it myself. Complete disarmament, and only developing nuclear power for domestic use. And if that can be replaced, all the better. Of course i realise that's a tiny bit unrealistic but meh, people can dream.

Sure it is something to dream of but I don't see it happening anytime soon...

I vote for nuclear war on a global scale.

Then we could all start over again and do things right. Plus, the weak would be culled from the herd. It'd be like slash-and-burn agriculture, only more so!

I vote for nuclear war on a global scale.

Then we could all start over again and do things right. Plus, the weak would be culled from the herd. It'd be like slash-and-burn agriculture, only more so!

Except for the fallout making all agriculture impossible for, like, millions of years or whatever. Apart from that its all good. I think in the event of nuclear war we should go with DR. strangelove's 'mineshaft' method.

Nuclear power is definately the way to go. I also am not against nuclear weaponry, though my reasons for that are mostly insane and I would rather not be ridiculed for them.

Liasia']Except for the fallout making all agriculture impossible for, like, millions of years or whatever. Apart from that its all good. I think in the event of nuclear war we should go with DR. strangelove's 'mineshaft' method.

I think fallout won't be so much of a problem. That was always predicted for like, USSR/USA total nuke exchanges. I'm talking, just enough nukes to destroy civilization as we know it... which is far less.

Besides, the slash-and-burn was a metaphor. Destroy the old, to make way for the new and tasty.

I think fallout won't be so much of a problem. That was always predicted for like, USSR/USA total nuke exchanges. I'm talking, just enough nukes to destroy civilization as we know it... which is far less.

Besides, the slash-and-burn was a metaphor. Destroy the old, to make way for the new and tasty.

I would think a few airbursts and the resulting EMP would wipe out most of civilization due to the electronic damadge. But if you want to get rid of infrastructure or hardwired electronics you have to use big fat nukes on the ground. Lots of fallout, lasting damadge.

We need them to fight Meteors.

I say yes because if there were to be a nuclear war than only small countries like Ireland would survive...
wait...
I change my answer...

http://www.thatvideosite.com/view/1286.html

Even Ireland isn't escaping that shit.

Liasia']http://www.thatvideosite.com/view/1286.html

Even Ireland isn't escaping that shit.

Ireland?

You're joking, right?
If we go through with this how then, do you suppose, we enforce this? Unwilling nations will probably nuke us back. So I vote for nuclear reduction, leaving a proportion of nukes around as deterrent.

You're joking, right?
If we go through with this how then, do you suppose, we enforce this? Unwilling nations will probably nuke us back. So I vote for nuclear reduction, leaving a proportion of nukes around as deterrent.

Someone has to de-nuke first. No country is realistically going to nuke another when you think about the cataclysmic results for EVERYBODY. Nukes are redundant because of their potency, and having less of them is just as bad.

Ireland?

The poster (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10712244&postcount=9)two posts above suggested that Ireland would somehow survive a nuclear aypoclapyse. I personally doubt it, but stranger things have happened.

The poster (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10712244&postcount=9)two posts above suggested that Ireland would somehow survive a nuclear aypoclapyse. I personally doubt it, but stranger things have happened.
Ah. Ireland would be the first place I'd nuke. Just because I don't like green.

The poster (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10712244&postcount=9)two posts above suggested that Ireland would somehow survive a nuclear aypoclapyse. I personally doubt it, but stranger things have happened.

Think about it you have the world powers nukeing eachother to hell. What do you think happens to all the smaller countries? Ireland and many other similar nations wouldn't exactly be high prioreity targets.

Ah. Ireland would be the first place I'd nuke. Just because I don't like green.

It'd sort out those smarmy leprechauns, with their bloody gold too. It'd be worth it just to see the look on their faces....

Ah. Ireland would be the first place I'd nuke. Just because I don't like green.

Grrr....
Green rocks!!!

Yes, I am an asshole that likes to try to piss people off

Ah. Ireland would be the first place I'd nuke. Just because I don't like green.

But I live there! Surely that counts for something?

Yes, I am an asshole that likes to try to piss people off

In that case, congratulations.

Liasia']It'd sort out those smarmy leprechauns, with their bloody gold too. It'd be worth it just to see the look on their faces....
http://www.jms101.btinternet.co.uk/basic_sets/bodies/leprechaun/shocked.gifhttp://www.jms101.btinternet.co.uk/basic_sets/bodies/leprechaun/shocked.gifhttp://www.jms101.btinternet.co.uk/basic_sets/bodies/leprechaun/shocked.gifhttp://www.jms101.btinternet.co.uk/basic_sets/bodies/leprechaun/shocked.gifhttp://www.jms101.btinternet.co.uk/basic_sets/bodies/leprechaun/shocked.gifhttp://www.jms101.btinternet.co.uk/basic_sets/bodies/leprechaun/shocked.gifhttp://www.jms101.btinternet.co.uk/basic_sets/bodies/leprechaun/shocked.gifhttp://www.jms101.btinternet.co.uk/basic_sets/bodies/leprechaun/shocked.gifhttp://www.jms101.btinternet.co.uk/basic_sets/bodies/leprechaun/shocked.gifhttp://www.jms101.btinternet.co.uk/basic_sets/bodies/leprechaun/shocked.gif

http://www.jms101.btinternet.co.uk/basic_sets/bodies/leprechaun/shocked.gif[IMG]

It's just... not the same.

If we have a nuclear war, humanity is fucked.
Ultimately, the US would win. China would survive, but the US could possibly make an exception to the incredible cost of nuclear carpet-bombing due to China's high concentration of people. Now, US will win simply because everyone else would run out of plutonium. And because the USA is so huge, it will have the biggest natural plutonium deposits. Also, the only ones that would possibly survive are third-world countries that stay neutral, and some indonesian islands, the ones that are too small to warrant bombing. Perhaps Switzerland, due to it's neutrality and ability to completely seal it's borders, with AA guns and mined passes and tunnels set to fall. After all, it is encircled by mountains, and no-one is going to get through. Also, nuclear bombs are incredibly costly. No carpet bombing would happen, so small outposts, ie towns and villages, would survive. After the US decimates, it will move too far too fast and overextend itself, leading to a total annihilation of the strongest power in the world (at that time). Anarchy will ensue. Guns will be widely used; gangs will spring up as a small replacement for a nation- an allegiance to make sure that the members are less killed. Soon, though, these gang-armies will ally, creating larger and larger armies until they are conquering in the combined name, forging new nations. Within five years the stored gunpowder supplies will be used up; the gang-armies will break up, and thought will start going to building new ones. This will take a looong time, due to ninety-eight or thereabouts percent of civilians being killed, and the small number of architects capable of building such will be far down. Expect the first factories to be finished in ten years, and gunpowder actually becoming a viable resource in another fifteen. White powder five years after that. In the meantime, archaic, medieval technology will be capitalized upon- swords and spears and the bow.

After around fifty more years of fighting, a single empire will rise. If it stays whole, it will surpass Genghis Khan's. Then, and only then, will society begin rebuilding itself. Perhaps two hundred years of technology will have been lost. Due to the nature of nuclear arms perpetuating WWIII, technology will be very carefully monitored. Several other empires will arise, and there will be perhaps five nations. All will have nuclear capabilities, but fear to use them due to the catastrophic nature of WWIII. Eventually, society will resume as is normal for this day and age, but in about five hundred years, for all restrictions and laws and bans to be gone. Society will be VERY militaristic for about a hundred years past thew start of WWIII.

Just a studied opinion.

actually, the largest natural uranium reserves are in a Russia, which coincidentally has the largest nuclear weapon (tsar Bomba, potential for 100+Mt yield, about 3 times larger than the largest U.S. bomb)

Due to the speed of a nuclear war (approx. 30 minutes from first launch to last detonation) no nation could really be said to 'win' a nuclear war, all three nuclear super-powers have enough weapons to destroy life on Earth as we know it without help from anybody else. Fallow-up attacks in an all out nuclear war scenario would be nonexistent, even super-powers will only get off one salvo, as soon as they launch, evry other nation will launch and all the missiles will hit before another salvo can be launched.

Because all nuclear super-powers (and most other nuclear powers) are in the northern hemisphere, that half of the planet would be the worst off in a post-nuclear situation. The souther hemisphere would be pretty safe, wind currents don't usually travel north-south across the equator so even fall-out would be only a minimal concern

I vote for nuclear war on a global scale.

Then we could all start over again and do things right. Plus, the weak would be culled from the herd. It'd be like slash-and-burn agriculture, only more so!

Wouldn’t that more like starting over with those few people who happened to be on Arctic or Antarctic scientific studies.

Although it is not gonna happen, I will always support global disarmament.

The problem with nukes is that as long as the idea exists and someone things that they can profit by either their ownership or use, they will exist. North Korea and Iran can only lip off someone with nukes if they have nukes. It’s become the new standard of sovereignty in the world.

I think that there has to be some sort of scaled back disarmament, especially since warheads from the 60’s and 70’s are becoming old and unusable in their silos. In places like Russia security is a serious issue, with people in terrorism organizations seeking to try to obtain them. Having as many as there are in the arsonel of the World is irresponsible.

The truly scary fact is just how many nuclear weapons have been lost or misplaced during the Cold War. The Americans alone have lost a bunch of nuclear weapons. That’s right outright lost them. It was especially a problem during the Cold War when a lot of jets went up routinely carrying nuclear weapons and some had to ditch with them (or sub accidents). How many the Russians and other nations lost is probably as much or more scary.

The Bruce

The exact number of nuclear weapons the US has lost is officially 11. This of course is because this information was no longer made officially available after I believe it was the late 60’s, it’s hardly an accurate number. Here’s a good site on accidents with nukes.

http://www.thebulletin.org/article.php?art_ofn=nd00hansen
Known as the Oops List (nuclear)

Youre forgetting ONE thing the fact that in nuclear war youre going to nuke countries 'incase' they have nuclear weaponry. Towns will get blasted to smithereens I live in Cambridgeshire(England) and theres about 3 airports with American nuclear bombers in (or was cant remember but there probably still there) I'd be a shadow on the floor. It's also called M.A.D Mutally Assured Destruction everyone would be nuked think of those bases in the Pacific, India is getting nuclear capability, North Korea so the southern hemisphere isn't safe. People wouldn't be able to form gangs either radiation sickness anyone? If the major towns and get nuked the land will be covered in raditation so the survivors well mercy be on them. Also weapons would be fired at non-nuclear countries as well so that they dont get up and whack you so Africa would get it. So its M.A.D and MAD.
Enjoy nuking yourselfs:)

anyone else looking forward to defcon? http://www.introversion.co.uk/defcon/

It's based on the global thermonuclear war game from the film wargames :D

I think it's tag line is probably the truth about a nuclear war " It's Global Thermonuclear War, and nobody wins.
But maybe - just maybe - you can lose the least."

anyone else looking forward to defcon? http://www.introversion.co.uk/defcon/

It's based on the global thermonuclear war game from the film wargames :D

I think it's tag line is probably the truth about a nuclear war " It's Global Thermonuclear War, and nobody wins.
But maybe - just maybe - you can lose the least."

I'm looking forward to supreme commander- the successor to total annihalation. The origional was awesome, and this game looks soooo cool.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_commander