The United States has something like 5,600 nuclear warheads. A single one is capable of ending life as we know it. What number is enough of a deterrent for war hawks?
Yeah. The 7.5 times (or is it 9.5 times, I forget) thing that has been thrown around since the cold war days never rings true to me.
The primary and secondary strikes for both sides will take out people living close to either a military installation or a major city.
Also there’s no way even a world war would involve every single country and every single island. There’s no way human life would be entirely obliterated. Most us posting here, perhaps. Certainly I’d likely be taken out in the second or third wave (close to London and also close to a military base). But life would go on.
Many of those are due for retirement purely due to age. There isn’t a replacement system for many of them. Furthermore, countermeasures have gotten better; future designs will better take these into account.
Truth on lemmy gets downvoted. It’s really that simple. Most of our Nukes are the same age as our grandparents at this point. Our ICBMs are running on 5.25" floppy disks from the 70s. All this shit is OLD and desperately needs modernization for safety and security.
But if the headline was 'USA to replace ICE nukes with EV nukes" it would be upvoted and celebrated.
The United States has something like 5,600 nuclear warheads. A single one is capable of ending life as we know it. What number is enough of a deterrent for war hawks?
A single nuclear warhead is not capable of ending life as we know it, where did you read that ?
Have you heard of mutually assured destruction?
Yes, and it requires much more than a single nuclear warhead
MAD is a domino effect. One rogue launch is all it takes for nations all around the world to retaliate
Yeah. The 7.5 times (or is it 9.5 times, I forget) thing that has been thrown around since the cold war days never rings true to me.
The primary and secondary strikes for both sides will take out people living close to either a military installation or a major city.
Also there’s no way even a world war would involve every single country and every single island. There’s no way human life would be entirely obliterated. Most us posting here, perhaps. Certainly I’d likely be taken out in the second or third wave (close to London and also close to a military base). But life would go on.
Many of those are due for retirement purely due to age. There isn’t a replacement system for many of them. Furthermore, countermeasures have gotten better; future designs will better take these into account.
Truth on lemmy gets downvoted. It’s really that simple. Most of our Nukes are the same age as our grandparents at this point. Our ICBMs are running on 5.25" floppy disks from the 70s. All this shit is OLD and desperately needs modernization for safety and security.
But if the headline was 'USA to replace ICE nukes with EV nukes" it would be upvoted and celebrated.
Call me a bleeding heart but my preference would be that there are no future designs. The world needs to disarm of nuclear weapons
Yeah, let’s just let China take over the world and nuke us when we get uppity.
god yes, please President Xi fire Dongfengs at DC ASAP 🙏🙏
I’m on board as soon as we verify that Putin has completely disarmed.