Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

If one nuclear weapon is detonated, how much time until the human race's extinction? watch

    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bigmo7)
    Why would anyone want to nuke Switzerland for example? They are so neutral no country has any beef with them!
    Well if the swiss did have nuc.warheads and they did launch them then I would expect them to be toasted within 24hours.

    Which ever country let's one fly then the others, regardless of international relationship will gang up on it.

    Nothing unites people like the the threat of mutual destruction as they might be the next hit.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Allthewayhome)
    Well if the swiss did have nuc.warheads and they did launch them then I would expect them to be toasted within 24hours.

    Which ever country let's one fly then the others, regardless of international relationship will gang up on it.

    Nothing unites people like the the threat of mutual destruction as they might be the next hit.
    Yeah but the thread is about the extinction of the Human race...the point I was making was if two countries did ever start a nuclear war, surely a country like Switzerland or say for example Senegal, would be untouched because they generally do not have a part in such activities...

    What sense would it make to nuke them? :confused:
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bigmo7)
    Yeah but the thread is about the extinction of the Human race...the point I was making was if two countries did ever start a nuclear war, surely a country like Switzerland or say for example Senegal, would be untouched because they generally do not have a part in such activities...

    What sense would it make to nuke them? :confused:
    Ah I see your point!

    Well, even if a country wasn't directly hit there would still be a significant nuc. fallout.

    For example, the black isle of the west coast of Scotland received heavy doses of contaminated dust from Chernoby while several dairy herds in Dumfries had to slaughtered as well.

    We're at the mercy of the winds and the currents.

    http://www.bellona.no/bellona.org/en.../nuclear/28808
    http://www.food.gov.uk/scotland/safe...ernobylmonscot
    http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m.../ai_n31626201/
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bismarck)
    What utility does a leader get from destroying another country once his is already destroyed? It neither helps his own country nor helps his own reelection prospects, though it does hurt humanity, for which he might care at least a bit. Thus retaliating is not a rational outcome.

    Meanwhile, in order to deter a nuclear attack, a leader must show himself willing and capable of retaliating, which means he has to show he's irrational. Yet if he shows himself to be too irrational, the other side might think that their own nuclear deterrent won't deter and feel that they have no choice but to strike first. Fun stuff.
    What he may get from it is preventing another country from getting nuked, or a handful from getting nuked. After all if they nuked your country what's to stop them doing it to another? Of course you can never know for sure that would happen, but why take the risk? You'd gain nothing personally from it but it may save more lives than it kills.


    As for the thread question, I don't know. 2 billion years? More? Nuclear war certainly wouldn't wipe out the human race. We have underground bunkers which some people would survive in.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sephiroth)
    What he may get from it is preventing another country from getting nuked, or a handful from getting nuked. After all if they nuked your country what's to stop them doing it to another? Of course you can never know for sure that would happen, but why take the risk? You'd gain nothing personally from it but it may save more lives than it kills.


    As for the thread question, I don't know. 2 billion years? More? Nuclear war certainly wouldn't wipe out the human race. We have underground bunkers which some people would survive in.
    It doesn't directly help the leader to prevent another country from being nuked. Plus nuking someone guarantees that lives will be lost; you have no way of knowing whether that country would nuke a second country.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bismarck)
    It doesn't directly help the leader to prevent another country from being nuked. Plus nuking someone guarantees that lives will be lost; you have no way of knowing whether that country would nuke a second country.
    But is it not more rational to prevent the lunatic from doing the same thing again? I mean on a smaller scale we tend to lock murders up to prevent them doing it again as they're a perceived danger to society and no one thinks it's irrational. You can't take the risk that it's a one off.

    At the least one could justify rationality in tactically nuking the government and military capabilities to ensure they can't attack another country. But I suppose that's more preventative measures rather than full retaliation.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: August 5, 2009
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.