Do you think we will see Nuclear Warfare within the next 100 years? Why?

Question

With all of the controversy with Iran wanting nuclear privelages and our dispute with Iraq, do you think we will be dealing with the possibility of nuclear warfare in the near future?

Answer 1

Here's a brief summary of possible nuclear war scenarios: (but as you can imagine, it's only best guess)

N.Korea: Seoul is within tactical range,limited capacity for direct attack on continental USA, unless from medium range missile fired from a ship or sneaked-on weapon to US port. Most likely target is US forces in S.Kor and Japan. Any NorKor attack would be national suicide on their part, therefore probabilities are low for nuclear war.

Iran: poses little threat to continental US, largest threat is strike at Israel, main threat is future years when they do possess an operational nuke.

Pakistan: ally now but an unstable one, possibility their nukes can be taken over by terrorist elements against the US.

India: Ally but more stable, continued confrontation over Kashmir raises the possibility of a nuclear war, under a war situation, fanatical elements could put the control of weapon systems into their hands.

Terrorists: this is a new post-Cold War threat, not involve state actors or rational leaders. Many terrorists seek martyrdom and would see a US strike on a Muslim target as a positive step toward turning Muslim world against the US.

Britain,France,Israel: have sizable arsenals, concern is over the theft,pilfreage or diversion, as well as unauthorized or ciminal action to launch, which would have negative consequences for the US.

US: strategy is twofold: countervalue and counterforce targeting. The first on major cities,industrial complexes, and critical economic modes, with reduncy. The 2nd targets weapons systems before they can be launched, success relied on preemptive strike and maintenance of high alert forces, ready to launch on warning...ie, hair triggers.

These are general guidances, the actual targest are kept on list contained on the highly classified Single Integrated Operational Plan (SIOP). At the moment of decision, only the President can issue the command based on his reading of the SIOP. The world is continuously less than 30 minutes away from full scale nuclear war, unfortunately still at this time.

And now, the assessment for our friends in Russia:
From the point of view of strategic nuclear weapons, Russian is the main concern. The end of the Cold War has brought a sobering awareness of the vulnerabilitys of their nuclear complex, their security is downgraded with some assets left in new and unstable countries. Old habits die hard, the suspicions of US intentions are still there, look at the post-Cold War incident on Jan. 25, 1995 -

Russia almost launched a nuclear attack after a Norwegian missile launch for scientific research was detected from Spitsbergen and thought to be an attack on Russia, launched five minutes from Moscow. For the first time in history the Soviat briefcase is activated.

Getting back to targeting, the presence of highly survivable mobile systems, both in the US and Russia, vis-a-vis land-based systems, bombers and SLBMs has made countervalue and counterforce targeting obsolete. Both sides have recognized MAD and any launch would be national suicide. The only threat from Russia then is the irrational actions of rogue commanders or accidental launches from an aging control-command system.

And finally China: has some long range capability, covering most of continental USA. they have stated a "no-first-use' policy, even over the impending Taiwan crisis. Their real competition is economic and political, threatening to dominate the world markets. Russia is trying to sell strategic bombers and nuclear subs which would be of concern. There is some potential for future nuclear confrontation, but presently we are in a nuclear standoff with them.

Answer 2

You know what, this has been the question of the day since the atom was first discovered. Do you really want to spend your life worring about something so out of your control. Yeah if they did launch them all that would be the worst possible thing, but what would you do then anyway? Two possible scenarios. One, sit in a corner in the fetal position and cry about all the things you shoulda done, or Two, try to accomplish as many of them in the last remaining hours as humanly possible. What's the worst that could happen there. You could die doing it, gonna anyway, or you could live and have the best story to tell while waiting for the fallout to quit.

Answer 3

Haha, when I was in the bookstore today I took one look at the covers of her books and told myself "There's no way I would ever trust a book with the author on the cover if it isn't an (auto)biography." Sorry, but I am a firm believer that humans built the pyramids, hence, 40 is null and void to me. And when reading "one planetary government," the book "Nineteen Eighty-Four" came to mind... I'd like for some of the things that she said to come true, particularly the things about peace and the advances of certain sciences, but I can't really take what she says to heart.

Answer 4

The next 100 years?I see it happening within this decade. Too many extremist nations with nukes now, and more coming all the time. Do you think the Koreans are going to wait 100 years to flex their nuclear muscles?

Answer 5

Of course we will. Its happened in the last 50 and it will probably happen again in, Id say 5 years.

Answer 6

i don't know about you, but in the next 100 years i will turn 140 years old.

Answer 7

A nation doesn't arm itself with weapons that it doesn't intend on using.

Answer 8

anything is possible

unfourtunately