English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-05-12 18:32:14 · 13 answers · asked by x 2 in Arts & Humanities Philosophy

13 answers

50 %

2007-05-12 18:35:34 · answer #1 · answered by Ivan S 6 · 0 0

It could be 28 minutes from now or 280 years from now. When the superpowers square off against each other in two camps, then come back and we'll talk nuclear war.

Until then, just think regional conflicts, wars between rump states, proxy wars and brinksmanship. If you recall the Yom Kippur War in 1973, a coalition of Arab States (Egypt, Syria and Jordan) were soundly defeated by the Israelis. That was a worse situation than the current conflict and it didn't raise a blip on the world war radar (not that it didn't have the potential to spark a global war).

The next World War will involve a nuclear exchange, how could it not. In the first 30 minutes, nearly a billion people will have been vaporised, mostly in the US, Russia, Europe, China and Japan. Another 1.5 billion will die shortly thereafter from radiation poisoning. The northern hemisphere will be plunged into prolonged agony and barbarity.

Eventually the nuclear winter will spread to the southern hemisphere and all plant life will die. You ask when is the apacolypse, you are asking when will we commit global suicide. My answer is it won't happen soon because the larger superpowers are more rational than the rump states in the middle east.

Our biggest risk is an accidental launch of nukes by one of the nuclear powers, most likely the Russians. With their collapse, can we feel secure over an aging and ill-maintained command and control system...hmmmm, maybe we're closer to midnite than we realize.

2007-05-13 11:40:27 · answer #2 · answered by Its not me Its u 7 · 1 1

1/3

2007-05-13 01:34:10 · answer #3 · answered by Big Bird 3 · 0 0

nuclear war (mutual exchange of nukes), slim

nuclear attack (single detonation), more than slim, but still pretty skinny so far.

It was far more likely in the late '50's/early 60's than it is now. We came VERY CLOSE more than once.

2007-05-13 01:42:12 · answer #4 · answered by freebird 6 · 1 0

Close to zero right now.

Although it would be much cheaper than years in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The billions and trillions that will be spent, could easily be ended and provide a final victory by dropping a couple of bombs.

2007-05-13 02:55:09 · answer #5 · answered by guru 7 · 1 1

Very probable! Some nut will get elected in some dumb country & push the button with glee!

2007-05-13 02:22:20 · answer #6 · answered by Frogmama2007 3 · 2 0

I would say that they are quite low. We virtually all have nukes now and once one person launches one, everyone is going to end up nuking eachother. I wouldnt be too concerned about it if i were you. Governments worldwide realized that we would all kill eachother so quickly, theres no way its going to happen in our lifetime.

2007-05-13 01:49:12 · answer #7 · answered by RocketMischa 1 · 0 0

as long as nuclear weapons are existing....1.

2007-05-13 02:10:28 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

Slim to none.

2007-05-13 01:34:47 · answer #9 · answered by Joker 4 · 0 0

Very low.

2007-05-13 01:40:03 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers