Nuclear Disarmament

[Makalakumu]

Another thread going in the Study got me thinking. How important should the issue of nuclear disarmament be in politics today? We humans have made it over 60 years without turning the world into a nuclear wasteland, should we expect that to last? Is M.A.D. really a deterrant or is it a dangerous game of Russian Roulette? If Nuclear Disarmament really is important, how could it realistically be accomplished?

I posted this thread in the general section of the study in the hopes that we can entice MT's international community for comment.

 

[Sukerkin]

There is nothing more chilling than the prosepct of leaders begining to think in terms of a nuclear war they can 'win'.

MAD worked as advertised, so instead of a 'furnace', we got the Cold War, with conflicts being waged around the world for dominance via proxy.

The genie is out of the bottle and will not be put back. Of course, that is not to say that the genie cannot be made smaller, saving quite a bit of cash along the way .

 

[Big Don]

There is nothing more chilling than the prosepct of leaders begining to think in terms of a nuclear war they can 'win'.

MAD worked as advertised, so instead of a 'furnace', we got the Cold War, with conflicts being waged around the world for dominance via proxy.

The genie is out of the bottle and will not be put back. Of course, that is not to say that the genie cannot be made smaller, saving quite a bit of cash along the way .

Like he said, You CANNOT unring a bell. Nuclear weapons exist, the best we can hope for is to keep them out of the hands of people such as Ahmadinnerjacket and others like him.

 

[grydth]

Kudos for initiating this thread - is what needs debate, here and at the national level.

Everyone so far views a nuclear war with horror, as well they should. But what of a nutcase like Iran's Allmadjihad?

Would this death cult devotee feel the same revulsion we would at seeing a nuclear weapon hit Israel - or would he look at it as a fulfillment of prophecy? Would he mourn the Iranian dead, sure to be in the millions - or honor them as the required "martyrs"? Would he even care bout the immense environmental damage to the Middle East and indeed the world?

I would love to hear McCain/Palin and Obama/Biden address this one. If diplomacy fails and Iran is about to produce several nuclear weapons, what if anything would you do? Follow up - what would you do if Iran used them on Israel?

 

[teekin]

I think in the case of one country using a nuclear weapon against another the aggressor should be treated like a rabid dog. A beast that has clearly lost it's ability to think rationally and now is a danger to everyone. It would be in the worlds' best interest to wipe the aggressor off the map with conventional weapons.
Lori M

 

[Makalakumu]

I've heard some schemes where international agreements slowly reduce the amount of nuclear weapons over time. And then, eventually, the various countries give up their ability to deliver and create nuclear weapons. Does anyone think something like that could work?

 

[Big Don]

Saber rattling by those who would never draw, much less use a saber is nothing more than an empty threat, and everyone knows empty threats on sight.

 

[Big Don]

I've heard some schemes where international agreements slowly reduce the amount of nuclear weapons over time. And then, eventually, the various countries give up their ability to deliver and create nuclear weapons. Does anyone think something like that could work?

In a perfect world, sure. However, there is no such thing as the perfect world.

 

[theletch1]

I've heard some schemes where international agreements slowly reduce the amount of nuclear weapons over time. And then, eventually, the various countries give up their ability to deliver and create nuclear weapons. Does anyone think something like that could work?

Certainly! They would work just as well as a voluntary gun ban would work in DC, New York, LA. The folks that wouldn't honor the treaty and would hold on to their weapons would be the folks that would be most likely to use them. As was already said, the genie is already out of the bottle. The world has nukes, eventually, someone is going to use a nuke. The question is, will the world have the intestinal fortitude to deal with the repercussions of their use?

 

[Andy Moynihan]

Onliest thing ANY of us can do is be fortunate enough not to be in the immediate blast radius and then get to wherever is "safe" for as long as it will matter.

It *is* inevitable, there's no point whistling past the graveyard.

 

[Mark L]

I've heard some schemes where international agreements slowly reduce the amount of nuclear weapons over time. And then, eventually, the various countries give up their ability to deliver and create nuclear weapons. Does anyone think something like that could work?

Quantity reduction will almost certainly occur with current holders, those things are expensive to maintain. Quantity increase will almost certainly occur among those with nuclear aspirations. The ability to make and deliver likely won't be sacrificed, no way given my previous sentence.

 

[Sukerkin]

It *is* inevitable, there's no point whistling past the graveyard.

How about chanting:

"O Mighty Ones
Our Ancestors, Our Kindred:
We, your children honor you.
You whose life and death creates our lives;
You whose wisdom upholds our wisdom;
Hear us as we name you, and invite you to our fire..."

That'll at least ensure that our 'company' will be in a good mood as the influx of 'new guys' occurs en masse.

 

[teekin]

Onliest thing ANY of us can do is be fortunate enough not to be in the immediate blast radius and then get to wherever is "safe" for as long as it will matter.

It *is* inevitable, there's no point whistling past the graveyard.

Now Andy, why do you take such an extreme position? ( I'm hoping for a "limited" nuclear event myself) but would like to hear your reasons.
Lori:wavey:

 

[CoryKS]

I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

 

[Andy Moynihan]

[/b]
Now Andy, why do you take such an extreme position? ( I'm hoping for a "limited" nuclear event myself) but would like to hear your reasons.
Lori:wavey:

Look.

However high up any political power position gets, it remains occupied by a *human*

And human nature is the same in global saber rattling as at any two-keg penny-ante poker game.

See there's this unusual game people start playing when they want to "win" with no clear objective. They don't know what constitutes "winning" but by the gods they know they gotta DO it!

And what happens in this game, is that at some point, to make the "other guy" back down first, people start trying to "win" based on being the most willing to go TOO far the fastest, and not based on the actual strength of their hands.

We've all seen it. One guy implies he's gonna "win" because he is willing to go "this far". Answer shoots right back--"Oh yeah? Well, I'm willing to go THIS far!"

Bit like flooring the accelerator because you're afraid to go fast.

Same thing with people whose pride or need to "win" or be "right" won't let them walk away from a brewing violent situation, even though they may be about to kill someone or be killed by someone over the STUPIDEST tiny thing. Eventually someone hauls off and hits the other , or flashes a weapon because they are willing to go THIS far!

My favorite was the third party camcorder footage I saw where there had been some kind of rumble over something and it got to the point of one guy pulling a sidearm, and the other guy, because he couldn't be seen to "lose" and probably had a few drinks in him as well, loudly proclaimed "You ain't got the balls".

Guess what?

He had the balls.

And then almost instantly, he and everyone around him, got this shocked "Deer-in-the-headlights" look about them like "Holy **** I really DID shoot him!"

Now I know what you're thinking, because it's probably exactly what I'm thinking: If you didn't wanna kill him, A) Why'd you pull the weapon and B) why are you surprised now that you've succeeded?

Because they needed to "win", whatever the hell that meant, so bad they shut their brains off.

And you're honestly, SERIOUSLY gonna look me eye to eye and tell me with a straight face that just because it takes place in some UN meeting between two guys in suits instead of on some inner city street that the outcome is gonna be any different?

The mere fact that we all recognize the importance on this forum of MA training ought to be enough to demonstrate that we already KNOW that when these things happen, betting your life on the other guy doing the smart thing--AIN'T THE SMART THING.

 

[Mark L]

... ( I'm hoping for a "limited" nuclear event myself) ...
Lori:wavey:

Are you actually hoping for the event, or merely wishing that if and when it occurs, it is "limited"? Kidding ...

Perhaps my view is naive, but I think the limited nature is almost assured. The mostly likely threat comes from newbies on the nuclear stage, whose devices may not rival the established powers in sophistication, delivery systems, and yield. I hope ...

 

[teekin]

Well Andy I will state my case but will add that you may have the advantage here. I think you have perhaps seen more ugliness than I have so have a slightly darker, some would say more realistic, view than I.
I have met some brilliant men, the movers and shakers, the guys who are changing this world, Jay Diamond ( aka Tad Cavalier) ( Fuzzy Logic , Pentium I and II, who knows what now) Darrin Tirven ( wrote software for mars rover, based on how an ant moves and problem solves , makes sense now right) David P Clements ( developing shielding to protect electrical components from radiation using rare earth magnets.) These are just guys I know, none of whom would be pulled into a pissing contest where they had to "WIN" by going too far too fast. Their ego's are not that fragile, they would recognize the game for what it was and walk away. :idea:
Now I am hoping that the leaders of the powerhouse countries elect or have in power are close to the best and brightest of that generation. Someone who makes my friends look like C- students. These guys should be able to avoid red neck bar room brawls, negotiation should take place as if in a corporate board room or court room, not Teddy Bob's Liquor, Guns and Ammo. ( Stippers on Fridays, Sat night)
So if there is someone who fires off a nuke it is a small renegade country that can be quashed as an intolerable threat to mankind by the rest of the world.:nuke:

 

[teekin]

Are you actually hoping for the event, or merely wishing that if and when it occurs, it is "limited"? Kidding ...

Perhaps my view is naive, but I think the limited nature is almost assured. The mostly likely threat comes from newbies on the nuclear stage, whose devices may not rival the established powers in sophistication, delivery systems, and yield. I hope ...

Some days I want to be right at ground zero, somedays I want other people right there with me.:matrix:
Lori

 

[Andy Moynihan]

Well Andy I will state my case but will add that you may have the advantage here. I think you have perhaps seen more ugliness than I have so have a slightly darker, some would say more realistic, view than I.
I have met some brilliant men, the movers and shakers, the guys who are changing this world, Jay Diamond ( aka Tad Cavalier) ( Fuzzy Logic , Pentium I and II, who knows what now) Darrin Tirven ( wrote software for mars rover, based on how an ant moves and problem solves , makes sense now right) David P Clements ( developing shielding to protect electrical components from radiation using rare earth magnets.) These are just guys I know, none of whom would be pulled into a pissing contest where they had to "WIN" by going too far too fast. Their ego's are not that fragile, they would recognize the game for what it was and walk away. :idea:
Now I am hoping that the leaders of the powerhouse countries elect or have in power are close to the best and brightest of that generation. Someone who makes my friends look like C- students. These guys should be able to avoid red neck bar room brawls, negotiation should take place as if in a corporate board room or court room, not Teddy Bob's Liquor, Guns and Ammo. ( Stippers on Fridays, Sat night)
So if there is someone who fires off a nuke it is a small renegade country that can be quashed as an intolerable threat to mankind by the rest of the world.:nuke:

I suppose one can hope....the world needs people who don't view the world through rose colored glasses but rather the cold smoky grey of truth.

But the world needs hopers too.

 

[Cryozombie]

Personally I dont think we can disarm. We SHOULD disarm, don't get me wrong, but I don't think we can.

I think the trick is going to be defense... building something ala "STAR WARS" to protect us from missles, (only that works, heh) to limit an agressor nations options for delivering a nuclear payload. Then we can shift our worry to defense against smaller-scale nukes like suitcase nukes, dirty bombs, and thier ilk.