Signed Up:
Jul 23, 2013Comments: 546 · Posts: 6870 · Topics: 474
This is related to TrueCap's thread on a post-apocalyptic world. But I decided to just make it about the possibilities of a global nuclear war and surviving one if possible. But throwing some of those possibilities aside I only think during these days and times a limited nuclear exchange (Which is a nuclear war limited to a specific region) is possible. Say between India and Pakistan or Israel and Iran. Then there's also the possibility terrorists may get their hands on one and use it. My father always told me that when he was in school they had to do drills where they ducked and covered underneath their desks in the possibility of nuclear attack, same thing with my mom. They both had to do those exercises in the event Russia or China launched a nuclear attack on U.S soil. I tell them these days a global exchange isn't exactly in the highest probability but my dad insists that the threat of a nuclear attack is far greater than ever, since the end of the Cold War. I could believe him but I tell him the risk of limited nuclear one is probably the highest since no one's that stupid to go War Games on our asses. But he still insists that global one's are possible because he believes that a limited exchange is a stepping stone to global one. I could believe him but me being stubborn and looking for the brighter side of life usually says I'm not going to believe it. And for our society recovering after GNW, the U.S wouldn't exist anymore. A lot of countries wouldn't. Apparently Dwight D Eisenhower had plan to command the U.S from a fortified bunker in Washington D.C in the event of a nuclear war, but I see that meaningless. Everyone would be out for themselves, the military and police would be more concerned about their loved ones and families than trying to uphold the U.S and economy would be non-existent. We'd have to start a new country and build from scrap. Now going off of what I said, do you honestly think a Global nuclear exchange could still happen in this time and age?
Signed Up:
Oct 17, 2013Comments: 373 · Posts: 8645 · Topics: 308
Yes. Combine weaponized nuclear technology with a country, group (large or small) that has a god complex, secular or religious, and you have a recipe for disaster.
Signed Up:
Jul 23, 2013Comments: 546 · Posts: 6870 · Topics: 474
Okay I've got at least 5 minutes into the vid. But be aware this will take a while.
width="420" height="315" ="https:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4VlruVG81w"
Signed Up:
Jan 10, 2015Comments: 1877 · Posts: 16918 · Topics: 108
Nuclear war is near impossible. You have to realize the world powers are in control of this show, and they've threaded the world with a spider like web normal people call debt. In fact the same debt all world powers share with one another actually forces them closer together.
People tend to think a contry can wake up and just start nuking. Not even the US can start war without explaining the reasons why to the UN. If a country doesn't comply with the UN, the world powers slowly drain that contries economy until their forced to comply or go insane then become exterminated.
Think of your normal life. You wake up and go to work to provide for the family. You take orders from a boss, he takes orders from a boss, but down the line who is the main and final boss mortal wise? The UN.
Also a nuclear war will never make money. Small drawn out wars with no intent of winning or losing make money. Don't make it a big war or the winners will have somthing meaningful to pass on. Make them feel hopeless, which makes them find security in the hands of their powers.
"Even though you put me there in the first place, I'd like to shake your hand for pulling me back out."
Signed Up:
May 01, 2010Comments: 0 · Posts: 2977 · Topics: 102
Idk about a nuclear war, but i know for a FACT the U.S WILL be going to war with IRAN as soon as a republican get in office..
Signed Up:
Jul 23, 2013Comments: 546 · Posts: 6870 · Topics: 474
Then there's also the probability of an accidental nuclear war. I don't know if you played the game Wasteland for Commandore 64 but the premise of that game was asteroid fragments being mistaken for oncoming nuclear weapons and launches against the U.S happened and they retaliated and the world turned into a big pile of fuck. And there was the Norwegian rocket incident on January 25th, 1995. A Norwegian rocket 900 miles above Earth nearly got mistaken for a nuclear weapon launch against Russia, Russian nuclear forces were point on high alert and Boris Yelstin was about to turn his key on the briefcase. Till they found out it was a weather rocket. Close call for sure.
Signed Up:
Jan 25, 2012Comments: 8 · Posts: 20090 · Topics: 685
I think we're more likely to get wiped out by a contagious, air-born virus than we are by nuclear war.
Signed Up:
Jan 10, 2015Comments: 1877 · Posts: 16918 · Topics: 108
If we're talking a virus wiping out the population might as well make it a realistic zombie apoloclipse like in The Last of Us.
A natural or even scientific fungus mutation that takes over and animates living creatures even once the human is technically dead.
How living is the planet earth? Does it have the ability to create it's own way of cleaning the soil with disease/natural disaster, or is it random? Do humans have the ability to create somthing synthetic that will animate the dead?
Side note nuclear war is also doubtful due to the fact the area you bomb will be uninhabitable. If your taking over a country you might want your definitely not going to put radiation in it that will remain lingering for decades even centuries
Signed Up:
Jan 25, 2012Comments: 8 · Posts: 20090 · Topics: 685
A big threat is viral warfare. Man-made viruses released onto unspecting populations of a country's enemy. Then that virus spreads global affecting even the country that created it.
Signed Up:
Jan 10, 2015Comments: 1877 · Posts: 16918 · Topics: 108
Most world powers are smarter then that, and learned from the past deadly warfare is only their problem to clean up in the end. Not China, US, or Russia are that dumb today, and the UN has control of any smaller country that might be insane enough to try.
Signed Up:
Aug 04, 2010Comments: 1 · Posts: 3043 · Topics: 38
"Most world powers are smarter then that, and learned from the past deadly warfare is only their problem to clean up in the end."
Lol
Signed Up:
Jan 10, 2015Comments: 1877 · Posts: 16918 · Topics: 108
I don't mean air strikes or ground battles. I mean big nukes with radiation. Somthing that will linger for years.
Signed Up:
Jul 23, 2013Comments: 546 · Posts: 6870 · Topics: 474
Maybe I just do these as a way to deny the worst and not have to believe that we're all crazy enough to kill ourselves with nuclear weapons. Either that or I play too much Fallout and it's starting to mess with my head a bit. But then again it opened up the option and said it's there. I'm always trying to look to the bright side and know the opposite of fear, hope. And hope for the hope that there won't ever be one. World War III? Inevitable. A nuclear war? Stoppable, the best way to fight it is to not fight it at all. I see myself as Anti-cynical and don't want to have to see or know a future destroyed by a GNW. In some cases I don't know what to think.
Signed Up:
Jan 10, 2015Comments: 1877 · Posts: 16918 · Topics: 108
Just learn to fight fear with knowledge and hate with better understanding.
Even biological warfare is impossible. So what your going to spread sickness and disease to your enemy? What happened when it makes it way to your country?
It's all fear mongering, and I guarantee half of what they say they have is impossible to create still.
The only way I see a nuclear war is if one power had the ability to completly take out another power, and the losing power still had the time to hit the dead man's switch. Even then the winning power will have special ops stopping the losing power from blowing up the world.