Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Will we see nuclear warfare in our time?
iGrandTheftAuto.com Forums > General > Political & World News
Heartless
Iran has recently ramped up it's ability to produce nuclear armament with continued allegations of silo developments in Syria. They have also recently stated that, should the Americas and the UN continue to push forward in sanctions, they (America) will see a reprisal never before seen on earth. The Clintons seem to think this threat is legitimate and the Revolutionary Guard holds considerable power in that country. Almost as a response, the US has also accelerated nuclear production and now seeks to find new ways to dispose of waste. Coupled with an increased Russian-EU front, are these new tensions indicative of a new Cold War? Will we see a Nuclear War in our time?
Marney1
Nuclear weapons used in our lifetime? Probably but I don't think it will be two countries launching them at eachother it would likely be the U.S or Israel hitting someone with small (in comparrison of what's possible) nukes but the possibilities are endless with Pakistan and India having face offs now and again.
Also nuclear dissarmament is false because like any weapon requiring fuel they have a use by date so it's just another way of saying they're throwing away the bad eggs and replacing them with fresh ones.
As for a new cold war - it never really ended, there's been more spying going on than ever before in the U.K by Russia and China.
Heartless
QUOTE (marney1 @ Feb 16 2010, 11:44 PM) *
Nuclear weapons used in our lifetime? Probably but I don't think it will be two countries launching them at eachother it would likely be the U.S or Israel hitting someone with small (in comparrison of what's possible) nukes but the possibilities are endless with Pakistan and India having face offs now and again.
Also nuclear dissarmament is false because like any weapon requiring fuel they have a use by date so it's just another way of saying they're throwing away the bad eggs and replacing them with fresh ones.
As for a new cold war - it never really ended, there's been more spying going on than ever before in the U.K by Russia and China.


Not to play devils advocate, but you forget that the India/Pakistan wars only ended after they each developed nuclear weapons, which ensured peace between the two nations.

I think we'll see some denotation of a small dirty bomb, either in the US or the Arab world in the next ten years.

Also, don't discount China just yet; after WW2 they launched a significant assault against the royals when they knew we were powerless to oppose them. They may see this chance again, with the US wiped out after a war in the Middle East.
TreeFitty
It'll be the cold war all over again. I don't think anyone will actually launch them. If someone does, they probably won't find their target and the firing country will find themselves in deep shit.
Heartless
QUOTE (TreeFitty @ Feb 16 2010, 11:49 PM) *
It'll be the cold war all over again. I don't think anyone will actually launch them. If someone does, they probably won't find their target and the firing country will find themselves in deep shit.


And even if someone does drop the bomb and doesn't hit anything, it's still game day.
TreeFitty
Oh of course it is. One of the things keeping people in line for now.

talk shit and be fine versus nuke 'em and get fucked right back
Marney1
This has just got me wondering; if nuclear war starts (U.K being the target) our subs have a double safe in their bowels that can only be opened in this situation. Inside is a hand written note from Gordon Brown which gives his decision whether to fight back with nukes or not.
Only the Prime minister knows (officially) what is written in that note and that word is final. So if we're threatened and we don't see a launch of our own then what does he have in mind instead?

Also, peacetime rules are often broken on the seas between Britain and Russia and these often cause diplomatic confrontations. One trick I know of is British frigates are able to move close enough to photograph Russian navy ships in the darkness by cleverly using lights to disguise themselves as fishing vessels.
You sometimes hear about submarines getting damaged mysteriously, nothing mysterious about it - if two subs meet under the ocean they're at war no matter if their countries officially are or not. The only thing about the navy that isn't public is the wherabouts of it's subs so if a confrontation happens below the sea it can always be denied.

Just rambling on but it's sort of relevent.
Heartless
We have several "sky fortresses" - what used to be the Hercules models, only re-imagined - that supposedly circulate in the air 24:7. As the rumor goes, they are ordered to unload their payloads on whatever country launched a nuclear missile at the United States. This was created in the event that should the US government not be able to respond, they could at least retaliate.
0bs3n3
I doubt it would ever be condoned by a state. Most likely by separatists/terrorists as the risk of MAD is just too great.
TreeFitty
Plus all the other bases we have spread out around the world. We won't go down too easily.
Heartless
QUOTE (0bs3n3 @ Feb 17 2010, 12:37 AM) *
I doubt it would ever be condoned by a state. Most likely by separatists/terrorists as the risk of MAD is just too great.


And that's just it! When MAD was developed most countries were pretty solid, whereas the last ten years have seen a growing number of terrorist groups and military dictatorships. The world has never seen such division, at least, without WW1/2 erupting.
Marney1
I wouldn't be suprised if nukes where already buried underground in certain countries to be detonated and make it look like a domestic accident. We have weapons stashes in most countries round the world that can be dug up by 'tourists' upon entering a hostile country so why not nukes too?
0bs3n3
QUOTE (Geert Wilders @ Feb 17 2010, 04:40 PM) *
QUOTE (0bs3n3 @ Feb 17 2010, 12:37 AM) *
I doubt it would ever be condoned by a state. Most likely by separatists/terrorists as the risk of MAD is just too great.


And that's just it! When MAD was developed most countries were pretty solid, whereas the last ten years have seen a growing number of terrorist groups and military dictatorships. The world has never seen such division, at least, without WW1/2 erupting.


Interesting point. The tensions are probably the result of a lack of conclusive resolutions of disputes between countries. UN Resolutions don't count, either.
Spoiler
QUOTE (0bs3n3 @ Feb 17 2010, 06:56 AM) *
QUOTE (Geert Wilders @ Feb 17 2010, 04:40 PM) *
QUOTE (0bs3n3 @ Feb 17 2010, 12:37 AM) *
I doubt it would ever be condoned by a state. Most likely by separatists/terrorists as the risk of MAD is just too great.


And that's just it! When MAD was developed most countries were pretty solid, whereas the last ten years have seen a growing number of terrorist groups and military dictatorships. The world has never seen such division, at least, without WW1/2 erupting.


Interesting point. The tensions are probably the result of a lack of conclusive resolutions of disputes between countries. UN Resolutions don't count, either.


There will always be inconclusive disputes between countries. There always has been. India/Pakistan tension is nowhere near North/South Korea who are technically still at war. If there is a nuke attack, that's the first place to look.

I think the nuclear attack would happen due to a fanatic terrorists attack rather than a calculated attack by US or any other. There are other weapons such as cluster bombs for that matter without using nuke. Kim is not that stupid to use a nuke and stop his rule, he knew that by doing so even China will condemn them.

Iran is a different ball game though. I believe US will stop them "by military means" before they get the bomb.
0bs3n3
QUOTE (Spoiler @ Feb 18 2010, 12:27 AM) *
QUOTE (0bs3n3 @ Feb 17 2010, 06:56 AM) *
QUOTE (Geert Wilders @ Feb 17 2010, 04:40 PM) *
QUOTE (0bs3n3 @ Feb 17 2010, 12:37 AM) *
I doubt it would ever be condoned by a state. Most likely by separatists/terrorists as the risk of MAD is just too great.


And that's just it! When MAD was developed most countries were pretty solid, whereas the last ten years have seen a growing number of terrorist groups and military dictatorships. The world has never seen such division, at least, without WW1/2 erupting.


Interesting point. The tensions are probably the result of a lack of conclusive resolutions of disputes between countries. UN Resolutions don't count, either.


There will always be inconclusive disputes between countries.


War is pretty conclusive eh.
Spoiler
QUOTE (0bs3n3 @ Feb 18 2010, 05:15 AM) *
QUOTE (Spoiler @ Feb 18 2010, 12:27 AM) *
QUOTE (0bs3n3 @ Feb 17 2010, 06:56 AM) *
QUOTE (Geert Wilders @ Feb 17 2010, 04:40 PM) *
QUOTE (0bs3n3 @ Feb 17 2010, 12:37 AM) *
I doubt it would ever be condoned by a state. Most likely by separatists/terrorists as the risk of MAD is just too great.


And that's just it! When MAD was developed most countries were pretty solid, whereas the last ten years have seen a growing number of terrorist groups and military dictatorships. The world has never seen such division, at least, without WW1/2 erupting.


Interesting point. The tensions are probably the result of a lack of conclusive resolutions of disputes between countries. UN Resolutions don't count, either.


There will always be inconclusive disputes between countries.


War is pretty conclusive eh.


WW2 is yes, Iraq no!
TreeFitty
QUOTE (Spoiler @ Feb 18 2010, 01:59 AM) *
WW2 is yes, Iraq no!


For now.
Jacko
Even if there are new tensions on the horisont and new Cold War starting I hope they would'nt use those weapons. Using them wont do any good because nobody can win that kind of war. This planet would just turn into a dusty, gritty and lifeless place of black corpses and Terminators. Nope. If I would have to choose between nuclear weapons and terrorism I would choose the second one. I dont think these nukes are the issue and there isn't any clear tensions between nations. The only war is against the insivible enemy: the terrorists. No specific nations.
Heartless
QUOTE (Spoiler @ Feb 17 2010, 08:27 AM) *
QUOTE (0bs3n3 @ Feb 17 2010, 06:56 AM) *
QUOTE (Geert Wilders @ Feb 17 2010, 04:40 PM) *
QUOTE (0bs3n3 @ Feb 17 2010, 12:37 AM) *
I doubt it would ever be condoned by a state. Most likely by separatists/terrorists as the risk of MAD is just too great.


And that's just it! When MAD was developed most countries were pretty solid, whereas the last ten years have seen a growing number of terrorist groups and military dictatorships. The world has never seen such division, at least, without WW1/2 erupting.


Interesting point. The tensions are probably the result of a lack of conclusive resolutions of disputes between countries. UN Resolutions don't count, either.


There will always be inconclusive disputes between countries. There always has been. India/Pakistan tension is nowhere near North/South Korea who are technically still at war. If there is a nuke attack, that's the first place to look.

I think the nuclear attack would happen due to a fanatic terrorists attack rather than a calculated attack by US or any other. There are other weapons such as cluster bombs for that matter without using nuke. Kim is not that stupid to use a nuke and stop his rule, he knew that by doing so even China will condemn them.

Iran is a different ball game though. I believe US will stop them "by military means" before they get the bomb.


I'll hagger a guess you've never been to Kashmir. Anyways.

The clock just struck one minute closer!
TreeFitty
They'll be hyping their progress for some time to come. "yeah bitches! it's getting there!"
Marney1
Don't forget who runs the IAEA (NATO) everything is a maybe which means no or not enough evidence so take these accusations with a pinch of salt. Even if 'evidence' is produced we'll never know if it was doctored evidence, remember Colin Powell telling the world Iraq had mobile biological weapons factories? Convincing at the time but turned out to be bullshit and there always seems to be a defector who provides 'everything' they need to know.



If we are shown evidence of Iran attempting to produce a nuke we can never be sure if it was fabricated evidence it will just be down to the individual to believe it or not.
Masta
I'm no fan of a nuclear armed Iran but this whole issue is complete BS.

Israel has hundreds(supposedly) of nuclear weapons that are not declared under the NPT and thus are 100% illegal, and members of their CURRENT government have threatened to use them offensively against practically every Arab nation in existence.

Pakistan has nukes and is currently in chaos with numerous different dangerous groups having the potential to gain access to their nuclear weapons.

India has nuclear weapons thanks to the U.S and has threatened to use them against Pakistan in the past.

Israel starting a nuclear arms race in the Mid-East by developing illegal nukes isn't an issue, nor is their threatening to use them.

Pakistan's nukes having the very real possibility of falling into the hands of terrorists is barely worth a mention in the news, though NATO is doing a bit to try to prevent that as an offshoot of the Afghan war.

India threatening to kick off a nuclear war isn't a big deal either.

But the idea of Iran possibly trying to build nukes with no actual evidence to back it up is front page news and is a huge issue that will likely lead to war.


The issue of Iran having nukes has nothing to do with the nukes themselves as the Iranians are no more stupid than the Israeli's, Paki's or Indians and would never actually use them and kick off a nuclear war that would destroy their nation and it's very lengthy and proud history.

The only reason the U.S and Israel are so scared about Iran developing nukes is because it would threaten the balance of power in the Mid-East, threaten the hegemony the U.S and Israel have developed in the region.

Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Jordan, etc. are all "allies" of the U.S but they are not friends, if Iran was able to develop nukes and become a regional powerhouse of Muslim/Arabic/Mid-Eastern origin then chances are most of those American allies would bail in favor of supporting the homegrown Mid-East power that achieved that power even with the U.S and it's allies trying very hard to stop it.

If America can't stop Iran from developing nukes then people are going to start thinking the Americans aren't the best choice of allies, all those sanctions and all those threats couldn't stop the Iranians, at the very least it would be a massive propaganda victory for the psychological war going on.

This has nothing to do with Iran being a nuclear threat to anyone, it's about Iran becoming even more of a political threat to Israel and the U.S and it's plans for the Mid-East.

The Russians are the wild card in all this and nobody really knows where they stand since they are self-serving and will do whatever they think is best for themselves when the shit hits the fan.

All that can be said for sure - and people on all sides of the issue agree on it - is that this whole situation can only end in one way, and that's with total chaos across the Mid-East and possibly beyond.

---

To summarize: this shit is FUBAR.

And yes, I believe there will be a nuclear war before my days are done and I'd be willing to bet my life that Israel will be the main architects of that war.
Marney1
Nuclear blast victims would have to wait. So what now batman?
TreeFitty
What? What is it you want to know?
Marney1
QUOTE (TreeFitty @ Apr 16 2010, 02:15 AM) *
What? What is it you want to know?

I'm just curious what the fallout victims are going to do for 48 hours until FEMA turn up. (If it were to happen of course.)
TreeFitty
Watch their lives and society crumble and mutate, I assume.
Heartless
Mysterious fireball over midwest? Russian Jets perform aerial maneuvers over Norway? Polish plane-crash decimates government? Kyrgyzstan revolts against US backed leaders? Coincidence? You decide.
Marney1
QUOTE (Rick Astley @ Apr 16 2010, 03:47 AM) *
Mysterious fireball over midwest? Russian Jets perform aerial maneuvers over Norway? Polish plane-crash decimates government? Kyrgyzstan revolts against US backed leaders? Coincidence? You decide.

LOL I thought you were bursting into your own version of Billy Joel's 'We Didn't Start The Fire' for a second there.

I reckon the U.S is going to be hit by one of these dirty bombs which will then be used as the excuse to invade Iran. The F.B.I will magically find all the evidence it needs within about 2 hours that leads all the way to Tehran.
TreeFitty
I'll put bets on an American making and setting one off.
Marney1
QUOTE (TreeFitty @ Apr 16 2010, 04:01 AM) *
I'll put bets on an American making and setting one off.

If that were to happen say bye bye to 'freedom' as you know it.
TreeFitty
Nigga please...
Heartless
Did you know... Library of Congress just backed up the entire twitter database, and will continue to do so long as it remains in use? Is Social Media a tool of big government? Are they watching us through our own unscripted sitcoms?

We didn't start the nuclear fire, it's been burning on and on since the Mongols leveled Baghdad.
demon
QUOTE (marney1 @ Feb 17 2010, 12:44 AM) *
Nuclear weapons used in our lifetime? Probably but I don't think it will be two countries launching them at eachother it would likely be the U.S or Israel hitting someone with small (in comparrison of what's possible) nukes but the possibilities are endless with Pakistan and India having face offs now and again.

You are maybe right. Or it will be Iran launching a nuclear attack on Israel.
But many thinks a terrorist nuclear bomb or "dirty bomb" is more likely, and that's probably true.


QUOTE
Also nuclear dissarmament is false because like any weapon requiring fuel they have a use by date so it's just another way of saying they're throwing away the bad eggs and replacing them with fresh ones.

Interesting point. But USA and Russia have reduced the number of nukes anyway.


QUOTE
As for a new cold war - it never really ended, there's been more spying going on than ever before in the U.K by Russia and China.

Most of the spying now are industrial espionage, not military. The Russian and Chinese state may be involved but I wouldn't label it "cold war" just because of that.


Heartless
Alex?
demon
QUOTE (Spoiler @ Feb 17 2010, 09:27 AM) *
Iran is a different ball game though. I believe US will stop them "by military means" before they get the bomb.

The Iranian policy is to exterminate Israel. Who knows if Iran are serious about it, but I do think it is casus belli anyway.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2014 Invision Power Services, Inc.