Why do people think it'll be the end of the world?

[UrbanJungle]

If a nuclear war breaks out?

 

There are a few isolated countries that'll survive with little to no damage, why don't we see them in movies/novels etc?

[K^2]

Because these countries don't produce high tech, and their agricultural system will be f*cked due to weather changes, fallout, etc. Basically, even if a country is going to be relatively untouched, we're still looking at a Mad Max scenario.

 

Global, all-out thermonuclear war will be the end of our civilization. Not necessarily the species. It's entirely possible that enough humanity survives to recover, but they'll have to build civilization from scratch.

 

Fortunately, global nuclear war like that is extremely unlikely. We might have limited tactical exchanges, though. Especially if this nonsense with Russia continues.

[Svip]

Fortunately, global nuclear war like that is extremely unlikely. We might have limited tactical exchanges, though. Especially if this nonsense with Russia continues.

 

It didn't used to be.

[UrbanJungle]

Because these countries don't produce high tech, and their agricultural system will be f*cked due to weather changes, fallout, etc. Basically, even if a country is going to be relatively untouched, we're still looking at a Mad Max scenario.

 

Global, all-out thermonuclear war will be the end of our civilization. Not necessarily the species. It's entirely possible that enough humanity survives to recover, but they'll have to build civilization from scratch.

 

Fortunately, global nuclear war like that is extremely unlikely. We might have limited tactical exchanges, though. Especially if this nonsense with Russia continues.

What about australia and new zealand? australia produces modern technology and new zealand is self sufficient?

[Frank Brown]

 

Because these countries don't produce high tech, and their agricultural system will be f*cked due to weather changes, fallout, etc. Basically, even if a country is going to be relatively untouched, we're still looking at a Mad Max scenario.

 

Global, all-out thermonuclear war will be the end of our civilization. Not necessarily the species. It's entirely possible that enough humanity survives to recover, but they'll have to build civilization from scratch.

 

Fortunately, global nuclear war like that is extremely unlikely. We might have limited tactical exchanges, though. Especially if this nonsense with Russia continues.

What about australia and new zealand? australia produces modern technology and new zealand is self sufficient?

 

 

Australia wouldn't be left untouched. They're a US ally and would likely join us in most conventional war scenarios before they turn nuclear. They also have a handful of SIGNIT bases, which cooperate with the US as part of the UKUSA Agreement. I'm not sure about the Kiwis.

[am30]

If a nuclear war breaks out?

 

There are a few isolated countries that'll survive with little to no damage, why don't we see them in movies/novels etc?

 

Don't worry, our elected officals will be safe.

 

Nuclear war won't happen, the repurcusions would be horrific for everyone, including the country that set it off - look at the range of the fall out from Chernobyl. Imagine what it would be like for a series of nukes aimed at destroying an entire country. Political alliances would mean that in all likelihood it would not only be the target country that would be hit, but it's allies as well.

 

However, weapons like nukes are just used as a deterrent, a bit of political posturing.

[007_eleven]

Nuclear war will continue to be a real possibility until we have missile shields capable of reliably stopping ICBM's, even then you can still launch with a variety of short range platforms... People dismissing it due to the deterrence factor that may not last forever, tensions can escalate, power put into the hands of people who do have the balls to push the button...

 

We live in a global economy so no country will remain isolated, even if you do avoid fallout the economy, internet etc will be devastated, anarchy and lawlessness will likely take hold in the places that weren't directly hit.

 

If you have money and a piece of property prepping for such an event could be a sensible hobby.

 

As to the OP's question because American film producers and authors think their country is the center of the universe.

Edited November 9, 2014 by 007_eleven

[Gay Tony]

Nuclear war will continue to be a real possibility until we have missile shields capable of reliably stopping ICBM's, even then you can still launch with a variety of short range platforms... People dismissing it due to the deterrence factor that may not last forever, tensions can escalate, power put into the hands of people who do have the balls to push the button...

 

We live in a global economy so no country will remain isolated, even if you do avoid fallout the economy, internet etc will be devastated, anarchy and lawlessness will likely take hold in the places that weren't directly hit.

 

If you have money and a piece of property prepping for such an event could be a sensible hobby.

 

As to the OP's question because American film producers and authors think their country is the center of the universe.

 

I am curious what would realistically happen if the internet diappeared, if that could cause harm in of itself now that we've had it for a few decades?

[sivispacem]

No rational state actor is ever going to use strategic nuclear weapons. The only likely use will come from a rational actor becoming irrational, the chance of which I always thought was pretty slim Pakistan aside.

[Mr. House]

why don't we see them in movies/novels etc?

Because that would be a f*cking boring movie/novel.

Edited November 9, 2014 by Mr. House

[Svip]

No rational state actor is ever going to use strategic nuclear weapons. The only likely use will come from a rational actor becoming irrational, the chance of which I always thought was pretty slim Pakistan aside.

 

We have fortunately been quite lucky at times, even by our so-called 'rational actors'.

 

Until JFK, purely US maintained nuclear weapons (compared to the ones handled by NATO allies) were unlocked and had no PAL systems preventing usage without The White House's acknowledgement. In a sense, what happened in Dr. Strangelove could have happened in the real world. In 1985, the USSR did develop a system like the Doomday Machine, called Perimeter, which would launch the USSR arsenal if nuclear weapons were detonated on Soviet soil.

 

After JFK, PALs were installed on all US nuclear weapons. But the US Air Force took great offence to these measures, believing the discipline was a better security measure than system, and while the US Air Force denies it, there is enough evidence that for decades the code was 00000000.

 

But even with these security measures in place, during the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Soviet leaders were actively debating whether to nuke the West. And in 1995, when Russia detected a Norwegian missile as a nuclear strike from the US. It got so far, that Boris Yeltsin himself had to decide whether or not to launch a strike against the US.

 

It is fortunate for us that clearer heads prevailed in the end, but we've come damn close a couple of times, and imagine if we truly have had idiots as our leaders.

[Twilight Sky]

 

 

It is fortunate for us that clearer heads prevailed in the end, but we've come damn close a couple of times, and imagine if we truly have had idiots as our leaders.

 

But that was also in the past when people were different.

 

If said crisis happened in this time period.. and say Obama wasn't president, yeah, Earth would be blown up.

 

So. please let our slowly dying Sun take care of Earth's fate.

Edited November 9, 2014 by Twilight Sky

[Svip]

 

 

 

It is fortunate for us that clearer heads prevailed in the end, but we've come damn close a couple of times, and imagine if we truly have had idiots as our leaders.

 

But that was also in the past when people were different.

 

If said crisis happened in this time period.. and say Obama wasn't president, yeah, Earth would be blown up.

 

So. please let our slowly dying Sun take care of Earth's fate.

 

 

1995 was the last time a close call occurred. That was after the Cold War ended. 1995 is only 19 years ago.

[sivispacem]

The Norwegian Sounding Rocket incident was very similar in that respect to Able Archer 83, which is arguably the closest we've been to nuclear war even including the events of the Cuban missile crisis. I knew about the absence of PAL on tactical nuclear weapons for a long time but didn't realise it was also true of strategic ones. That's quite sobering.

[K^2]

Hopefully, Perimeter is long dead. Right about now is where it'd start malfunctioning.

[sivispacem]

Apparently it isn't. Well, the Russians confirmed it as operational as recently as 2011 and some of the shortwave radio stations rumoured to form part of it (The Pip and The Buzzer spring to mind) are still operational, albeit intermittently.

[K^2]

I wouldn't trust Russian claims on it. The problem is that it is designed specifically to treat mass-failure as an attack and to respond to it. And given the state of Russian maintenance on everything else, I wouldn't trust Perimeter to remain functional. I really hope people in power weren't insane enough to keep it working the way it originally was designed to. With any luck, Perimeter has no ability to launch unilaterally anymore. But maintaining its components makes sense, because it works as an extra deterrent to the West.

 

On the other hand, if somebody decided to keep Perimeter fully functional, well, the end of the World might be much closer than we all would like to think.

[sivispacem]

I don't think it's truly autonomous though, or ever has been. I'm inclined also not to trust Russian claims on it but mostly as far as true autonomy goes. I think it's more likely to be a system for coordinating second strike capability after the fact in the event that the traditional command structure and methods of communication are destroyed.

[Graven]

If human race gets rid of itself, another animal will claim the crown.

World spinned around the sun before human, and it will spin around the sun after human. You can't nuke it away.

End of human is much more likely to come with a huge meteor than nukes.

Useless waste of money to keep such arsenals maintained and in condition. Are we sure they even are all in proper condition? No one wants to use them, but they sure are a big concern of eco catastrophy.

[Doc Rikowski]

 

Fortunately, global nuclear war like that is extremely unlikely. We might have limited tactical exchanges, though. Especially if this nonsense with Russia continues.

 

It didn't used to be.

 

 

Great article.

It really makes you understand that the only real solution is complete multi-lateral nuclear disarmament. Problem is world political and military leaders have a too restricted mindset to conceive it.

[sivispacem]

It's more the fact that no-one trusts each other to actually disarm. With good reason.

[am30]

Disarming shows a weakness. As someone wise pointed out, if Scotland were to become independent we would be getting rid of the nuclear deterrent and thus no long be part of NATO. There were concerns raised by other member nations that we would then become a weak point and a target. Personally, I doubt it would ever come to that but I can see where they come from with the nuclear deterrent argument.

[lil weasel]

Believers need something.

The Church likes people to feel that way. When a big news story breaks on the subject the donations pour in from the suckers thinking to buy their way into the heaven they have heard about, just in case, you know .

There is also an increase in birth rates,

And there are the people who believe that they can live through a real "End of the World", as they have done before, so consumables and purchases of survival gear sell, et cetera.

[Tyler]

No rational state actor is ever going to use strategic nuclear weapons. The only likely use will come from a rational actor becoming irrational, the chance of which I always thought was pretty slim Pakistan aside.

 

Bringing this back up: how do you think the situation between with Pakistan will be handled in the future? The shaky nature of the government and the hostilities with India make the region seem like some sort of tactical exchange is inevitable.

[feckyerlife]

According to ISIS it will be 1500 in the Islamic calender or 2076 in the western calender.

[Spaghetti Cat]

I wouldn't trust Russian claims on it. The problem is that it is designed specifically to treat mass-failure as an attack and to respond to it. And given the state of Russian maintenance on everything else, I wouldn't trust Perimeter to remain functional. I really hope people in power weren't insane enough to keep it working the way it originally was designed to. With any luck, Perimeter has no ability to launch unilaterally anymore. But maintaining its components makes sense, because it works as an extra deterrent to the West.

 

On the other hand, if somebody decided to keep Perimeter fully functional, well, the end of the World might be much closer than we all would like to think.

 

Perhaps I'm misinformed, but I had heard that Perimeter was inplace because the upper levels of the Soviet Government didn't trust each other. They set up an automatic system to keep the hot heads away from the trigger to launch ww3. Although I could be mistaken...