How I learned to love the bomb

[Zeramo]

I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.
Albert Einstein

Any fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius - and a lot of courage - to move in the opposite direction.
Albert Einstein

Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
Albert Einstein


Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen.
Albert Einstein

I think that sums up my view on A-Bombs and the people who are in charge of the powers that have this capability

 

[Lord Beautiful]

If they could all be magically made to instantly disappear, then it would be great. Since they can't, it's sadly necessary to have them in order to stop nutcases who would otherwise use theirs to rule the world.

It's also good to have a small stockpile ready for use against possible rogue asteroids and/or possible unpleasant encounters with alien lifeforms, extremely unlikely as both might be.

I was about to say this. Well, the first part. I hadn't even considered the second part.

EDIT:

only if aliens are coming to invade the earth. Other than that not more than 10 are needed for offensive and defensive tactics.

Didn't you watch Independence Day? It does nothing.

Then we'll send Will Smith after them.

 

[manaman]

Props on the Dr. Stranglove reference in the thread title.

We don't need them, the fact that everyone just hasn't decided to disarm all the nukes and put the left over material to better use, such as nuclear power plants, is rather contradictory to everyone's stance on the possession of them.

Asking if we need them is pointless, because despite what anyone says it boils down to that we now have to keep the status quo with everyone else who's got em. The real question is why have we not gotten rid of them and stomp anyone who attempts to make more into the ground.

Not the same material used in power plants. They did dissemble the 114 Peacekeeper missiles and reuse the launch vehicles to put satellites into orbit. I got to see one of the last ones at Hill AFB. They had it set up in the silo and allowed us to take a bunch of kids down there to view it as a part of the community service stuff we did. Don't worry the first thing they did is remove the warheads, they get used to compliment the supply for the Minuteman III missiles. The missiles only got to Hill to be converted into launch platforms.

For those of that think we have way to many Nukes, realize there are only about 450 missiles left. Each (according to treaty) should only have one reentry vehicle, or warhead. However they where each designed to carry three. Each nuke average only about 20 times the yield of Hiroshima bomb. This is a very far cry from the activists "enough to blow up the world twice over" stance. Especially when you consider that the force of the a bomb logarithmically decreases with distance from the center. Meaning 20 times as powerful does not mean destroying 20 times as much.

The Peacekeeper missiles never should have been retired in my opinion. Each was able to carry 10 warheads that where each individually guided reentry vehicles.

Then again being able to set an example for the world by dismantling a $20 billion project to produce advanced missiles capable of pretty much hitting anywhere on the planet is a good idea, I just don't want to see the country left without an adequate deterrent to other power with massive weapons (as some my come to realize conventional bombs are reaching near nuke levels in power).

You cannot uninvented them. They are fact, you gotta live with that. Just because you are not crazy enough to use one does not mean someone else is not.

Also trying to keep them out of the hands of unstable despots is a totally different story then going in and trying to kick France, Russia, or hell even China around for developing nukes. You just cannot do that, the US is not the worlds police.

 

[Cleverpun]

It doesn't matter in the long run. They've been working on combat-worthy lasers and weaponized antimatter for a while now.

 

[Katherine Kerensky]

"Momma always said, 'World War Three will be fought with nuclear weapons. World War Four will be fought with pointy sticks.'"

Kinda like what einstien said : "I know not what weapons with which world war 3 will be fought, but world war 4 will be fought with sticks and stones".

or something along those lines.
Anyway, I like nukes lovely mushroom clouds. Potential for rapid mutations/evolution in the fallout zones of their use. I just can't help but love the pinnacle of Humanity's Gift for self-destruction

Edit: Oops, just found earlier post with einstein quote.

 

[Valiance]

The shortsightedness of people never ceases to amaze me.

Currently, I'd probably say that nuclear power is one of the greatest achievements of mankind. Nuclear weaponry is sure to follow any advance, as we turn anything we discover into a weapon as soon as possible. But remember, nuclear power is a lot like a hammer...

You can use it to build a house.
Or you can use it to smash someone's face in.

The choice is up to the wielder.

The "superpowers" have nuclear weapons that they would most likely never use. We've been moving away from that kind of forced-stalemate cold-war, thankfully...But it boils down to this:

If people could learn to get along, we wouldn't have to be afraid of someone else having a club which could potentially be used to kill someone.

To that effect, I would say they are a necessary "evil," and by that I mean that it saved millions and millions of US and Japanese lives with the way that it was used at the end of World War II.

And honestly, well...Tim just wanted to find the Princess. And maybe for some, that was it. And maybe for me it would be a start of a higher use of nuclear power for civilians, or perhaps to go to the stars.

~~~~~~~

Remember: Competition brings out a reason to advance. America had a need to develop something like this because it didn't want to do an island invasion of Japan.

I get the feeling that we wouldn't have the amazing benefits of nuclear technology we do today if there wasn't a need to use the technology as a weapon then. Less research would have been done if there wasn't a cold-war and a need to stay on top with technology, space travel, and nuclear capability.

I find it difficult to get my point across here, but I'm just saying that over the course of history, there hasn't been advancement until there's a reason to advance, and most of that is competition from other people. And that if we didn't ever come up with it, we wouldn't reap its benefits today in the medical world and especially nuclear power.

 

[photog212]

They hold hope.
Hope for a better world.

"Momma always said, 'World War Three will be fought with nuclear weapons. World War Four will be fought with pointy sticks.'"

Albert Einstein is your momma?

 

[crabdog62482]

If the few countries that had them would give them up, then all the countries without them would have no justification to pursue them. They cost a fortune to make and upkeep, and realisticly, they are completely unusable. Using 1 nuke in this day and age pretty much comes with the stipulation that everyone who has a nuke must use their entire inventory, while the non-nuke countries have to use everything they got in retaliation, and thus more nukes are needed to squash their insolent faces. Nukes are the human suicide button (like Leminings), and they really need to go.

I would say, nukes are awesome in games, movies, etc, but no one has ever done the nuke justice in any media. The nuke is given too much credit, too little credit, or is factually completely incorrect. Example: The Terminator franchise hinges on nuclear annhialation, but the future is a radiation free zone, despite the issue of the radiation being the worst part of a nuclear weapon. A nuke without radiation is just a really big bomb, which isn't even in the same class of controversy as land mines, chemical and biological weapons, or white phosphurous (yes, I can't spell).

 

[Caliostro]

No one's going to use them, everyone knows they can't use them, but they're a sword of Damocles hanging over our heads.

Sadly, no one can just throw them away because everyone else has them.

 

[KeyMaster45]

*snip*

*snip*

Also trying to keep them out of the hands of unstable despots is a totally different story then going in and trying to kick France, Russia, or hell even China around for developing nukes. You just cannot do that, the US is not the worlds police.

This is the only part I disagree with, I did not say let the US police it. I was referring to the global community as a whole. Why assume that I meant the US, is it because that's where I live? Would you have assumed I was speaking of France, Russia, or England if I was a citizen of those countries?

That's kind of something I notice alot here on the forums, whenever people speak of enforcing international policy the first nation they jump to assumption in enforcing it is the US, yet everyone says that the US is not the world's police. If that's the case why do we all assume they are going to be the ones that step in and enforce it?

 

[Sneaklemming]

Nukes made the Second World War almost pointless; and they have stopped WW3 from happening, and will secure the future wide-scale peace in the world.

Thats how I see it - Peacemakers!

 

[manaman]

*snip*

*snip*

Also trying to keep them out of the hands of unstable despots is a totally different story then going in and trying to kick France, Russia, or hell even China around for developing nukes. You just cannot do that, the US is not the worlds police.

This is the only part I disagree with, I did not say let the US police it. I was referring to the global community as a whole. Why assume that I meant the US, is it because that's where I live? Would you have assumed I was speaking of France, Russia, or England if I was a citizen of those countries?

That's kind of something I notice alot here on the forums, whenever people speak of enforcing international policy the first nation they jump to assumption in enforcing it is the US, yet everyone says that the US is not the world's police. If that's the case why do we all assume they are going to be the ones that step in and enforce it?

I would NEVER trust the UN with something that important, they cannot even get a dirt poor nation in Africa to listen to them, or a dictator in a semi-poor Asian country. To enforce it would mean giving the UN powers I would not like them to have. It would be a very big step towards a world goverment. Without this kind of world goverment to back up restrictions and other non violent methods of control, it would probably take a more powerful nation going in and forcefully stopping another countries nuclear program.

More powerful nation with an interest: likely the US or some treaty involving the US. And it would be powerful western nations, I doubt China, any other Asian countries would give a damn, at least enough to throw their troops into the mix.

The countries right now with nukes: Israel, North Korea, Pakistan, India, China, US, Britain, Russia, UK, and France. That was why I mentioned them.

South Africa had bombs but has since dismantled them (a good thing as the goverment there gets a little more out of hand each year). Iran is trying to build them. North Korea is possibly trying to support Syria's efforts to build a bomb. Sometimes claims are made that the Canadians built a few, but I doubt this - Canada sits right above the US and really has not threats from the US there is not need for Canada to maintain a stockpile of massive weapons. Besides that who is going to attack Canada, really?

You can actually track the proliferation of weapons like fault lines from the old Cold War animosities.

US and Russia built them for MAD purposes to keep the other from attacking.

China started building them because it did not the trust Russia.

India then built them to counter the threat of the Chinese with them.

Pakistan of course has very old issues with India, cannot let them have the advantage. North Korea as well, but more as a bargaining chip then protection.

Then you have Israel, who wanted them as a means of saying - All out attack us if you dare Muslim states.

Now because Israel has them Egypt, Syria, Iran, Iraq (well did, they did find centrifuges, and possibly this is where Iran got them from), and Libya all have programs in place to try and build a Nuke.

Edit: I have no idea when or why the UK, and France built there weapons. Maybe they just felt left out.

 

[manaman]

"Momma always said, 'World War Three will be fought with nuclear weapons. World War Four will be fought with pointy sticks.'"

Kinda like what einstien said : "I know not what weapons with which world war 3 will be fought, but world war 4 will be fought with sticks and stones".

or something along those lines.
Anyway, I like nukes lovely mushroom clouds. Potential for rapid mutations/evolution in the fallout zones of their use. I just can't help but love the pinnacle of Humanity's Gift for self-destruction

Edit: Oops, just found earlier post with einstein quote.

Ionizing radiation can break down DNA inside a persons cells, mostly this results in cell death, but in some cases it can do minor enough damage that all you would get is a terminal case of cancer. Mutation from radiation is a myth. Your bodies heals from the exposure, it kills your slowly, it kills you fast, it might even kill you softly with his song. It does not make you grow a flipper out of your ass.

Also while I do like the message of the quote, I hate it being attributed to Einstein. He never said it.

 

[StarStruckStrumpets]

We don't need them. At least not for anything other than scare the living shit of whatever "enemy" is in fashionable.

We also have them so we may shit ourselves into fear. We won't fire ours because they'll fire theirs. It's a "MAD" world

Indeed.

 

[ElephantGuts]

Appropriately used (like the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki) they can prevent a lot more damage than they cause. People just need to be careful when they use them.

 

[seamusotorain]

We don't need them. At least not for anything other than scare the living shit of whatever "enemy" is in fashionable.

Ooh, China is the new thing, apparently!

 

[Zorg Machine]

in case giant cockroaches attack.....oh wait