What would happen if a regional nuclear war started in the middle east?

Question

Damage/Fatality/Casualty Estimates and Global Environmental Effects of such a conflict...

Answer 1

I'd be worried it would spread to the rest of the world.

Answer 2

Since the power of nuclear devices in the Middle East is something that is not available, it's hard to say what the casualties would be. Any exchange of weapons would probably end quickly as the countries shooting at each other would be overwhelmed by casualties. At that point, they might benefit from some neutral third party to act as a catalyst for negotiation. (Contrary to one answerer to your question, the "liberal democratic desire to negotiate" would not lead to atomic weapons being used on the U.S.A.) There would be hundreds of thousands if not millions of casualties. Global warming would not necessarily be affected in any significant long-term way, as we would be talking about dozens of warheads being exchanged, not hundreds. We would probably have some pretty amazing sunsets due to stuff being kicked into the atmosphere; this was the case when the volcano Krokatoa exploded in 1883. The rest of the world would then end up spending significant money on aid for the survivors. If oil production was affected, it would certainly affect oil prices but wouldn't necessarily lead to a new Dark Ages (there is oil outside of the Middle East; I live in a Canadian province that as much oil tied up in tar sands as has Saudi Arabia sitting underground). If refining capacity were damaged, it might put a squeeze on the supply and therefore price as well. Something that people don't realize is that things can be rebuilt quickly if there is a will; Germany was heavily bombed by the Allies and refineries and production plants that had been severely damaged were rebuilt surprisingly quickly.

It would be a catastrophe, but not necessarily a disaster for the rest of mankind.

Answer 3

The use of Nukes by Israel or any other country in the region will have devastating effects.

Depending on the kiloton yield, the outcry would be numbing. 500 kiloton strategic nukes would have global suicide implications, while tactical nukes will have regional implications.

Strategic nukes, at least a dozen of them in the 500 kiloton range would take out the middle east and vaporize around 190 million (3% of the world). Another 200 million in nearby countries would die from radioactive poisoning, and their only crime would be living next door to the Middle East.

Carl Sagan estimated a very low threshold for nuclear winter, a 100 kiloton blast would ignite fires that would cause a nuclear winter....ie, the sun would be blotted out due to the dust and ash from the fires and all plant life would cease to exist....followed shortly thereafter by animal life.

So the idea of a regional nuclear war in the middle east is global suicide....which is why nukes have been a deterrent to total war for the past 60 years

Answer 4

I think you should have asked the question When a nuclear war starts, not what would happen if a nuclear war started.

Well, when 9/11 happened, it ushered in the beginning of the final stages that will lead to WW III.

It will be so devastating that it will be as the bible says. Blood will up to the horse's bridle.

A notable televangelist by the name of John Hagee believes we should do a preemptive strike against Iran to usher in WW III.

Imagine that, a man who claims to preach the gospel advocating war. Jesus himself said that His kingdom was not of this world and that those who live by the sword shall die by the sword.

What does that tell you about the United States? We live by pushing our way of life upon other countries with weapons of war and that is how our end will come.

The United States is not without blame. We have set the stages for the final conflict.

This saying is true--you reap what you sow. Call it karma or whatever you want, however; the United States has sealed it's own fate by continually using weapons of war to try and enforce our ways upon the world.

Answer 5

The world would me even more f**ked than it currently is. Also people saying that world war three has started, WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT! The middle east has been used to these sorts of problems for a long time, this violence is nothing new! I mean sure, they don't like it, but is it something new there? NO!

In fact there is no way the Untied Stated can win this war "against terrorism" *cough* for oil *cough* I mean when Bush, that idiot, sorry all you Bushies (P.S. I don't believe in nonsense like political parties, they just make everybody angry and are useless, even George Washington before dying talked about how political parties would destroy our country, anyway, when Bush said that the U.S. is going on a crusade to the middle east, he was by definition saying the U.S. is going to wage a holy Christian war on the middle east. Not the best choice of words was it?

As you may have figured out by now, I am not at all in favor for the violence in the middle east, and I am proud that I was never for it for the beginning. I am, however, ashamed to say that I had originally though that Bush would have been a good leader for our country.

Anyway, I don't think that any nuclear war will start in the middle east, unless some "terrorist organization" aka all forces except the U.S. and our allies decides to go nuclear, but that would be stupid because they would be essentially poisoning their own country for years to come, unless in happened in the U.S.... well that would be a whole different story.

It is of my personal opinion that we should get the heck out of the middle east, because we are just wasting our money, effort, resources, and time, because the "terrorist organizations" will always be there, they have no other place to go, and so there will always be violence, but we cannot stay there forever, if we want to sustain ourself. Then we should focus on more important things like Korea and the environment. I mean who knows with the 442 billion dollars we have spent on the war (go to: http://costofwar.com/) we could have easily come up with a new type of fuel, energy source, or improved one so much that it would be almost harmless to the environment, but at the same time will never run out. (I think that we will not use only one type of fuel, but a variety of fuels, solar, hydro, wind, etc. Anyway I'll shut up now because I'm getting really off topic.

Well, that's my opinion, and I'm sorry if I pissed off a bunch of people.

Answer 6

It would be a huge catastrophe. Maybe 50-100 million people, maybe more. Hundreds or maybe thousands of billions of dollars in damage, plus a disruption of the oil supply that would affect the economy of the whole world. It might be WW III, as every major nation would want to get involved to protect its interests.

However I don't see it as very likely at all. I don't think any national leader would ever use nukes, because he has nothing to gain. There's no scenario whereby a nation can -win- a war with nukes because the first one to use them will become the enemy of the whole world, like Hitler, and everyone else will align against him. Every nation but the US has signed a no first use agreement, but once someone uses them all bets are off. And this is why the US has never used them since WWII, and why there was never a nuclear war between US and USSR or US and China, even though we thought at one time it was inevitable and unavoidable.

The only people who would use nukes are terrorists and crazies. If they ever got their hands on one, which is a bigger 'if' than you might think.

Answer 7

Only Israel and Iran have nuclear weapons, with two terrorist groups, Hezbollah and Al Qida with the financial means technical know-how to buy and arm a nuclear weapon. So if they had a coordinated attack, they could literary kill all 6 million Israelis. But if that country can launch, they would level several world capitals such as Tehran and Damascus. .5 - 1 Million dead before outside countries getting involved

Answer 8

The Union of Concerned Scientist did some predictions based on a possible nuclear strike against Iran. It would be devastating regionally causing millions of fatalities. Since most of our trade is based on oil, the world economy could collapse and sink into a kind of Dark Age.

Answer 9

It will, it is all spelled out if you take the time to read. Iran will join with Russia and some other nations to attack Israel, at the last moment it will fail, The attacking soldiers will as the bible says, "the flesh will fall from their bones before they hit the ground, their tongues will burn in their mouths and their eyes will melt in their sockets all before the bones hit the ground. Sound just like a nuclear blast doest it. anyway there will be a short period of peace right after that ( about 3 1/2 years) then all hell will brake out.

Answer 10

Probably Iran or another Arab country will hit US territory (or US troops in Iran or Iraq). Another way to start - if one of the Arab countries will decide to attack Israel. In both cases nuclear explosions will cover Middle East, in worst case States will get a couple of nuclear strikes. Europe, Russia won't launch their own bombs, but EU and ex-USSR countries will close their borders.
Amount of wounded and killed - around 5-10 mln. (Don't forget, that modern nuclear rockets can carry a couple of bombs - that leads to carpet bombing)
Damages - difficult to calculate, I would say 100 bln. $.
Environmental FX - global warming is going to be much worse due to huge amounts of radioactive dust. Contaminated land and sea.

It's a worst nightmare. I just pray, that this won't happen!!!

Answer 11

One possible outcome is in fact ARMAGEDDEN.

This is why the bloody US should never ever had conspired with France and Britain in violation of their signing of the Non Proliferation Treaty,to aid and abet ISRAEL getting nuclear weapons which most arms experts claiming that Israel has more war heads then Britain.

The resultant total imbalance of power is why countries like Iran (and India and Pakistan before it) are now understandably wanting what Israel has ,NO MORE,NO LESS.

Thank you America.Thank you Americans.