How to make the world give up nukes.

[Raider5678]

I wonder, what would be required to make the world give up their oh so precious radioactive explosive toys?

[Delta1212]

Losing the technical ability to produce and maintain them. Possibly a single world government.

 

Can't think of any realistic alternative to those two.

 

I suppose either a better toy or a fool-proof way of blocking their use globally.

[Raider5678]

I suppose either a better toy or a fool-proof way of blocking their use globally.

Hmm, so like a counter that would make it so any launched nukes would do nothing?

[Delta1212]

Yes.

[Raider5678]

Perhaps if we made a missile, that could grab a nuke and drag it out into space.

[zapatos]

Have a nuclear war. If any of us survive, we may decide to swear off nukes for good.

[StringJunky]

I don't think we should give them up. They are doing their job, which is keeping everybody scared. Also,There will always be a**holes like Kim Jong-un. Last but not least, we might need to deflect a rather large object in protest at being earmarked to make way for an intergalactic highway. Arthur Dent told me.

Edited November 8, 2016 by StringJunky

[Ken Fabian]

I suspect that as long as some nations feel entitled and even obliged to keep them as their weapon of last resort they will be sought by others to be theirs. They do seem to be highly prized status objects for a lot of nations, even ones with well equipped "conventional" militaries. Given the prevalence of "maximum force" style of military logic - more prevalent I suspect than Sun Tzu inspired "winning without engaging the enemy in battle" style - it's difficult to believe someone won't use them. Perhaps when faced with losing a war by other means. It chills me to know that Kennedy was being advised to use them - by people who really should have known better - during the Cuban crisis; I'm not convinced some other US Presidents and Presidential hopefuls would have been able to say no.

 

I do think it's hubris to think these things can't be developed independently, using novel pathways, by nations with a solid foundation of civilian nuclear technologies.

[StringJunky]

.... it's difficult to believe someone won't use them.

It's been good for 81 years.....M.A.D. still works even now.

 

The multi-megaton ordnance has just about disappeared. and the trend is towards smaller, precision ones, Armageddon is not the end game that the players aim for their enemies now, if possible. It was the lack of an autonomous, accurate guidance system that made them so big originally. They may, indeed, be used one day but by then it will be with weapons with a small destructive area and shortish half-life. The more time that passes now, the less of of the Doomsday scenario they will be. I'm inclined to think that NATO would retaliaite now with overwhelming conventional forces and regime change rather than a nuclear response.

Edited November 9, 2016 by StringJunky

[imatfaal]

Here is a stupid idea that no one will really take seriously in order to make people realise how damn silly the whole concept is - give the launch button to a bullying racist sexual predator like Donald Trump; then you realise how much of a knife edge we are balanced on. Luckily no one would be foolhardy enough to try out this idea...

 

 

 

oh god no!

[Raider5678]

Here is a stupid idea that no one will really take seriously in order to make people realise how damn silly the whole concept is - give the launch button to a bullying racist sexual predator like Donald Trump; then you realise how much of a knife edge we are balanced on. Luckily no one would be foolhardy enough to try out this idea...

 

 

 

oh god no!

Too late. We're all screwed.

[StringJunky]

Here is a stupid idea that no one will really take seriously in order to make people realise how damn silly the whole concept is - give the launch button to a bullying racist sexual predator like Donald Trump; then you realise how much of a knife edge we are balanced on. Luckily no one would be foolhardy enough to try out this idea...

 

 

 

oh god no!

It's almost like the US has voted for an Adolf Hitler. I don't mean he's like him literally but he is bizarre and extreme like him.

Edited November 9, 2016 by StringJunky

[Raider5678]

It's almost like the US has voted for an Adolf Hitler. I don't mean he's like him literally but he is bizarre and extreme like him.

Sums it up. If America was a person, whos like:

You want republicans? Coming right up. One Senate. One Congress. On President.

 

All 3 branches are republican controlled now, so there won't be much to stop any momentum.

[imatfaal]

Sums it up. If America was a person, whos like:

You want republicans? Coming right up. One Senate. One Congress. On President.

 

All 3 branches are republican controlled now, so there won't be much to stop any momentum.

 

And there is a vacancy on the supreme court bench.

 

And two Bill Clinton nominees are born in the 30s so could soon be forced from the bench by age or ill health - and the swing voter SCJ Kennedy is 80. Within a few years of Trump presidency there could be one of the most right with supreme courts ever - so TParty Republicans could have White House, Congress/Senate, Courts all together!

 

May you live in interesting times - just please not this interesting!

[Raider5678]

 

And there is a vacancy on the supreme court bench.

 

And two Bill Clinton nominees are born in the 30s so could soon be forced from the bench by age or ill health - and the swing voter SCJ Kennedy is 80. Within a few years of Trump presidency there could be one of the most right with supreme courts ever - so TParty Republicans could have White House, Congress/Senate, Courts all together!

 

May you live in interesting times - just please not this interesting!

Hmmm. According to Elon Musk to fly to mars should be about 200,000~ Think I'll do that. Oh wait, damage will be done by that point.

[ThoRe93]

A way to prevent the use of nukes might be direct democratic control of the declaration of war with say... 88% approval.

Think about it, a single autocrat with full power will survive the doomsday scenario underground with his family and will therefore consider nuclear options, an elite might very well be ready as well and accept to declare a nuclear war, but a whole people going on suicide mode is just extremely improbable.

What about deterrence from other people's attacks? well that can be set to automatic response. If they attack we automatically retaliate but if everyone's using real democratic control for attacks then there won't ever be a nuclear war

[Ken Fabian]

It's been good for 81 years.....M.A.D. still works even now.

 

 

I'm not convinced Mutually Assured Destruction was ever an intrinsically stable deterrence - and my understanding is there were some close calls besides the Cuban Missile Crisis. Not that it wasn't a real deterrence, but it doesn't apply so well when there is confidence that the enemy will be unable to retaliate after extreme force is used. Between well armed protagonists even a small possibility of a retaliatory strike is likely to remain as a serious doubt, but when the enemy is seen to be incapable of retaliation the confidence of a Commander in Chief that a nuclear strike can win a war without endangering his/her own forces is going to be stronger. Clearly there are other considerations that have acted as restraints or we would have seen them used before now even though I doubt there is any innate abhorrence of such extreme force by military commanders. There can be international as well as internal condemnation and retaliation - not necessarily nuclear or even 'conventional' military reprisal - to be feared and even small nukes applied with precision are going to have collateral damage; I've often wondered if the rise of Islamic terrorism is in large part a consequence of repeated interventions in their nations by outsiders employing what appeared to be overwhelming force, by superior military forces that saw themselves as beyond the reach of effective retaliation. Short of genocide there will always be survivors, most of whom had no say in the triggering events, who can be left with enduring, unreasoning and unyielding hatred - which can be exploited along with religious differences by extremist organisations.