Archived version: https://archive.ph/exXWL
Archived version: https://web.archive.org/web/20231020013821/https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-67163903
You must log in or register to comment.
Isn’t China one of the countries that already has enough nukes to glass the entire world multiple times over?
What difference does it make if they have even more?
…or is that stat bullshit? I’ve heard it parroted pretty much my entire life, but never actually thought to fact check it until now.
The idea is that you scatter them around so that it couldn’t be taken out with a single attack, and you also want more than a few per location as various countermeasures diminishes the chances of them actually hitting.
But yes, it’s kind of pointless as if we ever reach the point of nuclear war, it will be total destruction as everyone will use their full arsenals to avoid giving any other country an advantage post nuclear winter.
“The results found that 100 nuclear warheads are adequate for nuclear deterrence in the worst case scenario, while using more than 100 nuclear weapons by any aggressor nation (including the best positioned strategically to handle the unintended consequences) even with optimistic assumptions (including no retaliation) would cause unacceptable damage to their own society.” – source
You had the same reaction I did. Seems like once you have enough nuclear weapons to destroy humanity, you have more than enough.
True, but I think it’s more psychological than practical. Nuclear warheads have had a bit of a mental version of the inverse ninja law. The reality is that two nuclear weapons have been used in real world conflict and they were catastrophically devastating enough to stop a nation that was potentially willing to fight to the last dead civilian. Those weapons were also small, weak, and easily disrupted compared to today’s. We’re not really good at understanding that France can destroy life on earth just as effectively as the US and China so when someone has thousands they’re scarier than someone with 200, even though 200 would do more than enough damage to everyone
These are propably the weapons of mass destruction the US never found in Iraq
Why does Xi always look like he’s bored and doesn’t want to be there? It’s like he’s in a work training, and they’re 3 hours into a powerpoint on checking personal emails on a work computer during business hours. He’s one slide away from rolling his eyes.
Says the country with, like, 90% of the world’s nuclear arsenal.
Russia’s nuclear arsenal is bigger than US, so your comment falls flat.
While the numbers are wrong, the argument still stands that with a 4th of China’s population, the US has more than 10 times the Chinese nukes count
Right, but the number is pointless, as any use by a nuclear power will result in total world destruction.
Alternative perspective: anyone increasing their number is concerning, any nuclear superpower increasing their number indicates intent to use. We have too many but they’re ones we haven’t gotten rid of. We aren’t making more, we’re using ours mostly as trading chips to disarm others
In fact, US and Russia combined own around 89% of all the nuclear arsenal.
Officially
No it most certainly is not
Unless you know something that we don’t, Russia actually does.
It’s reported that Russia has a few hundred more than the US. We had treaties that allowed inspections up until a few years ago, actually.
I just did a quick check. Both western and non-western sources agree that Russia’s arsenal is bigger.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/6/12/china-other-states-fortify-nuclear-weapons-arsenals-report
https://www.statista.com/statistics/264435/number-of-nuclear-warheads-worldwide/
I did not expect that. I honestly thought the US had by far the biggest arsenal.
The US arsenal certainly was bigger until quite recently I think.
Are you saying the US is a hypocrite for monitoring other combative countries, enemies, and super powers for their nuclear arsenals, especially as they near world ending numbers?
Should we not be paying attention to that?
Do you propose the whole world just take each others word on whether or not we still have nukes and just agree to turn them in? Pinky promise?
Do you think everyone would honestly do that?
How many people do you think would die from a move like that.
Please tell me what your solution is to the problem of nuclear weapons having been discovered 80 somethin years ago (close to a century now).
You think nukes are scary? Try on biological warfare + AI gene editing for size. If you and people like you are serious about nukes and why they’re bad then you need to pony up and start making some actual points instead of throwing childish insults and quips. Times running out
