/int/ – No shittings during wörktime
„There is no place like home“

File (max. 4)
Return to
  • Allowed file extensions (max. size 25 MB or specified)
    Images:  BMP, GIF, JPG, PNG, PSD   Videos:  FLV, MP4, WEBM  
    Archives:  7Z, RAR, ZIP   Audio:  FLAC, MP3, OGG, OPUS  
    Documents:  DJVU (50 MB), EPUB, MOBI, PDF (50 MB)  
  • Please read the Rules before posting.
  • Make sure you are familiar with the Guide to Anonymous Posting.

No. 11608
2,4 MB, 1 page
25 kB, 674 × 829
Recently I came across an interesting article making the argument that nuclear weapons have been and will continue to be irrelevant. Not just in practicality but the very idea of their use being a paranoia of a post-1945 world that saw WWIII as inevitable. Instead, the author finds our fears of such weapons have proved far more detrimental with preventative action against Iraq being an obvious example. Such an opinion remains controversial but also something backed up by growing historical evidence.

I was wondering what Ernst thoughts were on the subject and nuclear weapons generally. We are after-all looking at a world of increasing proliferation and even the threat of a pre-emptive attack remaining on the horizon. This ultimately poses another question of whether the international community should prevent the spread of nuclear weapons at great cost rather than trust ourselves to not obliterate one another. If Iran rushes for the bomb and it becomes common knowledge, should they be stopped? Is it simply too naive to assume that no nation will ever use nuclear weapons again?

Personally, while the biggest fears of nukes were disproved simply by you reading this, I feel that all the same they have an enormous impact. Even if it might be irrational when looking at it on paper, it matters as a counter-balance to masses of Soviet tanks or American air-power. Equally it matters that nukes effectively guarantee security against intervention in a world broadly interested in protecting basic standards of international human rights. If we're looking at an age of growing international government it stands to reason that nuclear proliferation will prove ever more dangerous to a rules based order.

This post feels low-quality but I've already drawn the picture.
No. 11612
42 kB, 505 × 400
259 kB, 1000 × 750
I read in a book dedicated on the subject released in the 70s that American
administration had realized even in Korea war times that nuclear option was a
very problematic one in terms of politics.

No one wants to be the first that presses the button.

Although it depends of the level of mania of the leader and its "F├╝hrerprinzip" power I guess

For now it's OK enough.

Nuclear weapons have incredible destruction power.


The Iraq issue was kind of laughable if it wasn't for all the dead.

Iran is another issue.

P.S. All glory to Stuxnet
No. 11617
>reventative action against Iraq
That was always a complete and total lie from beginning to end. US spent more time harping on chemical weapons anyway, since we at least knew for a fact this wasn't imaginary (because we sided with Iraq while they were using those chemical weapons on Iranians in the 80s).

I personally think that what's going to happen is the same kind of stupidity as you see today with kids larping as fascists, Nazis, and Soviets, because they are stupid ignorant children who have no idea the risks their ancestors took in stopping these things from hurting us all.

I think that the US in particular has been shifting towards a way more cavalier attitude towards nuclear weapons, particularly with our idiotic leadership. Latest example is Trump, who's been obsessed with our nuclear stockpile and basically has only been curbed by the actual adults and old guard preventing him from doing anything too stupid. Putin likewise is part of that old guard who realizes nuclear weapons are not a toy. I think with the loss of people like Putin and various US officials we're going to wind up with a generation of people who think nuclear weapons are no big deal to use in a war. I think this is even more likely because a lot of these pathetic little shits have never known real war or hardship in their lives so they see war in general as a "fun" thing to do. Everybody thought WWII wouldn't happen because of how horrible WWI was, and people thought WWI wasn't going to be that bad either, yet every generation has the same dumb cunts who get this idea in their heads of "honor" or "glory" being found in war, and the same impulse or a similar impulse (since none of these people are anywhere near praising something even reminiscent of virtue, let alone concept such as "honor") is going to get these idiots saying well it won't be such a bad thing. Already I know our military has been toying with the idea of secretly using "small" tactical nuclear warheads as bunker busters or for taking out strategic points like airports, and only has not done so or at least not done so openly (there are rumors we nuked an airbase in Iraq in the 00s that I find credible) because of fear of nuclear response.

The only thing stopping US from doing it is our general political/governmental/military/bureaucratic infrastructure has not collapsed to Belarusian standards at least not yet despite how hard certain people mainly Trump, Kushner, and Giuliani et al have been trying to completely destroy all our vital institutions.

My one consolation is knowing that should it happen, the major urban centers will be vaporized and the survivors in the Midwest will suffer horribly, since it will likely be people from those regions and the deep south most loudly demanding a nuclear response regardless of the scenario.