Welcome to Our Community

Register on JustAnimeForum and start chatting about anime with like-minded people!

Sign Up / Login
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Thank you for the years of fun feel free to join the discord here! Please enjoy the forum for the short time it may be up feel free to make an account here or see what forums you dont need to make an account here
    with love,
    shedninja the sites biggest bug

Nuclear Weapons

Discussion in 'Hall of the Elders' started by Timekeeper, Oct 26, 2016.

  1. Timekeeper Great Big Jerk

    Rank:
    Rank:
    Rank:
    Messages:
    474
    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2013
    Likes Received:
    125
    Trophy Points:
    205

    Ratings:
    +125 / 0 / -0
    So, with the current election and me sweating more than a pig in Death Valley because of who might get control of the nuclear weapons, I wanted to speculate something: what would the world be like if we had no nuclear weapons?

    A good amount of us know that during the period between 1945 and 1991 that the USA and the USSR squared off with their ideologies across the globe in places like Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Yemen. We even came close to nuclear war because of an incident involving Cuba. But we didn't fight the USSR directly because of the fact that it would lead to Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) of both countries.

    What do you think the world would have been like if neither country (or any country for that matter) developed a nuclear weapon? What kind of actions do you think we would have taken differently?
     
  2. sayWut Head Market Research Analyst

    Rank:
    Rank:
    Rank:
    Messages:
    835
    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2013
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    245

    Ratings:
    +151 / 0 / -0
    Well the biggest threat to humanity, apart from humanity itself, is the destructive capability of nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons have been a massive deterrent for years. We have all seen videos and know how destructive they are, and the damage they leave afterwards, for thousands of years , with out the threat of nuclear warfare gone, all the chaos that it would leave behind. IMO with all options considered, I honestly think conflict would have came to be and a bloody one at that.



    [​IMG]

    As I said, with the threat of radiation, uninhabitable land, mass global destruction, possibly end of all human life, nuclear winters, competently radiating the worlds ocean. I presume, your discussion is about all types of nuclear weapons, such as biological type missiles /"nukes"?. Regardless It was quite known statistically that the USSR had more troops, especially with the release of there new Tank production still rolling from ww2 and there constant improvement in tank Armour, It's hard to decide what could have happen but in my scenario a stale mate or all out war could have happened, I think the USSR would take advantage of there increased tanks and general fire power.
     
    #2 sayWut, Oct 26, 2016
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2016
  3. Core Trophy Hunter

    Rank:
    Rank:
    Rank:
    Messages:
    1,785
    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2015
    Likes Received:
    488
    Trophy Points:
    265

    Ratings:
    +488 / 0 / -0
    A Roald without nukes would obviously be safe. If we aren't using nukes to blow up each other, why on earth are they being produced?
    No matter.
    Nuclear deterrence theory has been keeping us relatively safe from nuclear attacks. However, all we need is for one guy to launch a nuke and the world will end.
     
  4. Vashnik Guest

    『   』
    Rank:
    Rank:
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Kind of reminds me of Red Alert 3.
    Allies had the Proton Collider, which was a clean (no hazardous fallout), yet equally destructive super-weapon. Soviets developed nukes of course. However, like past Red Alert games, time has been altered yet again and enter Japan (or Empire of the Rising Sun as they called in in-game), a new super power faction highly dependent on technology and use of nano-machines, which their super-weapon is based around.

    Needless to say, whether nukes existed or not, another form of WMD would have taken that place. It's just the kind of race we are. The super powers may or may not have been the same, but given the fictional story line of Red Alert 3 but the possibilities of different universes, it's very possible that other factions would have risen to a super power status with or without similar nuclear tech.

    Although I have brought in a fictitious story into this, there is no denying that our very roots are tainted and WMD's would have been created regardless of scientific or religious accounts of our history.
     
  5. Timekeeper Great Big Jerk

    Rank:
    Rank:
    Rank:
    Messages:
    474
    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2013
    Likes Received:
    125
    Trophy Points:
    205

    Ratings:
    +125 / 0 / -0
    Okay, I'll try to phrase it differently then

    What do you think the world would be like without WMDs (biological, nuclear, chemical, etc.)?
     
  6. Core Trophy Hunter

    Rank:
    Rank:
    Rank:
    Messages:
    1,785
    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2015
    Likes Received:
    488
    Trophy Points:
    265

    Ratings:
    +488 / 0 / -0
    Large scale wars would be the only replacement for WMDs.
    Simply put, humans will be the WMD.
    I think if nukes weren't developed, the next thing in line would have been biological. Chemical warfare was going on before nukes, but apparently it did not catch as much interest as the polluting radiation of nuclear weapons did.
    But then again, chemical was understood better than biological, like the nerve gas that was used (I think) in WW1.

    At this point, the next type of WMD would be kinetic, I think. Maybe an orbital satelite emitting microwaves.
    Unless something like what happens in Mobile Suit Gundam happens, where mirrors in space would focus on a target.
    But then, maybe weather control is in line next. Nobody said it had to be safe weather. Just throw this bit of atmosphere outta whack and you have a tornado.
     
  7. Vladnyx Everyone is the main character of their own life.

    Rank:
    Rank:
    Rank:
    Messages:
    5,211
    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2015
    Likes Received:
    609
    Trophy Points:
    120

    Ratings:
    +609 / 0 / -0
    To start with I want to look at what Nuclear Weapons have done since they were first implemented. Then I'll proceed to look at how events would have changed if they never existed. As we already know Nuclear Weapons greatly impacted WW2 and brought a quick end about to this war. In doing so it's globally made peacekeeper powers between other now nuclear armed nations. As nations nobody wants to see a full-blown Nuclear War due to the implications & dire problems that'll need brought to attention when faced with the aftermath.

    Now if Nuclear Weapons didn't exist the US likely would have continued with Air bombings targeting Major Japanese cities. As a result of this they likely would have won, the only key difference the War would have dragged on much longer and at a greater lose of life on both sides. When two oppositions are armed with around the same power neither side is going to want to back down. It becomes a matter of who out smarts the opposition and gets a key stronghold that sways the tides. Nuclear weapons don't play this role as their so destructive and at this point in time you hadn't a way to defend against them.

    At this time you war buffs can't forget the Soviets. They were busy with their own war against Nazi Germany. They eventually allied with the US. As a result they could have played a part in this major battle.

    Now if you ask me if Nukes didn't exist the world we live in would be even more violent than it is today. For instance following WW2 the US was involved in the Cold War as well as Korean and Vietnam. Without Nukes looming overhead in fear of widespread destruction these wars would have gone on longer. As a result of going on longer tensions would build and could have lead to a even larger war between these superpowers. Due to Nukes a act known as "Mutually Assured Destruction" aka MAD was implemented. It's function was to serve as a Peacekeeper to keep parties from waging full scale wars with one another, which wouldn’t have been the case if nukes didn’t exist.

    Going further am I saying Nukes are the only deterrent to going to war, certainly not. If it wasn't Nukes it would be something else. Now without Nukes I have to ask what break through in science they made. They contributed greatly to our understanding of atoms. Without this certain technologies wouldn't come into existence till much later. To keep things in line as they have been in the world thus far I feel Chemical or Biological weapons would have to overtake Nuclear Weapons. The reasoning is it can be widespread, difficult to protect against, numerous methods of implementing and this would be haunting to deal with. Also, they were far ahead in development of our new form of weapons. If for any reason these didn't enact a MAD another destructive force would have to take it's place. The only other types that could rival to take there place would be Kinetic or Electromagnetic (EMP). That's my view on the idea if Nukes didn't exist.​
     
  8. Vashnik Guest

    『   』
    Rank:
    Rank:
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Our history is steeped in violence. If WMD's never existed, we'd still be using guns, bows, or whatever weapon we could get our hands on like our ancestors. We'd probably still be attempting to discover a more powerful weapon just to reach a point of understanding MAD. The US Navy already has a functioning prototype railgun.
    If it's not WMDs, it's other forms of destruction.

    If we didn't have nukes, we'd probably be Star Wars level of tech and destruction (lasers and blasters, or similar minor destructive weapons to contribute to extended wars because nothing more powerful was developed and ultimately became a deterrent). Although, we probably wouldn't quite be "death star" level since that would guarantee an unnatural (by volcano, earthquake, or other normal disaster standards of "natural" events) ELE and would require significant advances in space-related technology.

    As a race, we humans have to learn the hard way of what NOT to do in the future. Mass genocide* would have to take place just to learn what nukes taught us in two giant explosions**.

    *Mass genocide would have to be at an even bigger scale just to produce the same kills per second potential of one nuclear warhead, then try to double that destructive genocide in two locations in a small interval of perhaps at most 10 minutes apart.
    **A comparison to ground, naval and air combat combined in kills per second to produce the same effect as two nuclear warheads.
     

Share This Page