Jump to content

No Hate No War?


29 replies to this topic

#21 LordNothing

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 14,945 posts

Posted 14 October 2022 - 08:04 AM

View PostNightbird, on 14 October 2022 - 07:55 AM, said:

Countries with low-to-zero gun ownerships have low-to-zero gun deaths.

If you are willing to accept one or two nukes going off every year, by all means, let everyone have nukes.


world powers are not the same as individuals. when getting nuked is a serious threat to your wealth and power you tend to be more restrained. these are not people who have nothing to lose.

Edited by LordNothing, 14 October 2022 - 08:05 AM.


#22 Nightbird

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God of Death
  • The God of Death
  • 7,478 posts

Posted 14 October 2022 - 08:14 AM

View PostLordNothing, on 14 October 2022 - 08:04 AM, said:

world powers are not the same as individuals. when getting nuked is a serious threat to your wealth and power you tend to be more restrained. these are not people who have nothing to lose.


World powers do not control the launch button, individuals do. Also, the less wealthy a country is, the less resources they can devote to preventing theft.

If Russia ever collapses, preventing generals from selling off nukes will be a huge nightmare.

#23 LordNothing

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 14,945 posts

Posted 14 October 2022 - 08:21 AM

View PostNightbird, on 14 October 2022 - 08:14 AM, said:

World powers do not control the launch button, individuals do. Also, the less wealthy a country is, the less resources they can devote to preventing theft.

If Russia ever collapses, preventing generals from selling off nukes will be a huge nightmare.


you steal a nuke what do you do with it? i mean you can enact a personal vendetta against your favorite whipping boy state, ramp up the violence against you and yours a thousand fold, or you can use that weapon as a deterrent to protect your own country from being exploited. the former has never happened, while the latter is why there are so many nuclear powers now.

Edited by LordNothing, 14 October 2022 - 08:22 AM.


#24 Nightbird

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God of Death
  • The God of Death
  • 7,478 posts

Posted 14 October 2022 - 08:32 AM

View PostLordNothing, on 14 October 2022 - 08:21 AM, said:

you steal a nuke what do you do with it? i mean you can enact a personal vendetta against your favorite whipping boy state, or you can use that weapon as a deterrent to protect your own country from being exploited. the former has never happened, while the latter is why there are so many nuclear powers now.


Once it's available for a price, most entities can afford one. Excluding some belligerent state actors, this would also include private, religious, political, and special interests.

Avoiding most serious examples, what if Greenpeace got 2 nukes, detonated one in the middle of nowhere, and threatened to nuke the next whale ship in order to save the whales? Silly and serious cases like that will pop up all over.

#25 Duke Falcon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Nova Commander
  • 376 posts
  • LocationHungary

Posted 14 October 2022 - 08:34 AM

View PostNightbird, on 14 October 2022 - 07:47 AM, said:

Given how much hate the OP has, peace is just a dream.


I have hate. You do. Everyone do. A human without hate never existed and would never exist.
But learn to controll and keep our hatred IS the key mankind yet need to learn. Trouble is that the time for that is short and get shorter every day.
Extinction of **** sapiens became a viable reality within a considerable timeframe. What we do and how however still a question up to debate spiced by smaller-or-larger conflicts only good to derail main attention from the main problems lurk beneath.

...

As for the need of more nuclear powers? Limited resources, limited budget overcared by delirious governments all around the world...

#26 LordNothing

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 14,945 posts

Posted 14 October 2022 - 08:46 AM

View PostNightbird, on 14 October 2022 - 08:32 AM, said:

Once it's available for a price, most entities can afford one. Excluding some belligerent state actors, this would also include private, religious, political, and special interests.

Avoiding most serious examples, what if Greenpeace got 2 nukes, detonated one in the middle of nowhere, and threatened to nuke the next whale ship in order to save the whales? Silly and serious cases like that will pop up all over.


im not really advocating the buying and selling of nukes. only plans for things like gas centrifuges and warhead designs being made available. uranium processing is still very expensive and not something the likes of greenpeace could afford (that would also be seriously ironic having an environmentalist organization deploy nuclear weapons on earth).

interestingly you would also have the spinoff of being able to deploy more nuclear energy globally. certainly a lot better for the environment than nuking the whales.

#27 Nightbird

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God of Death
  • The God of Death
  • 7,478 posts

Posted 14 October 2022 - 09:57 AM

View PostLordNothing, on 14 October 2022 - 08:46 AM, said:


im not really advocating the buying and selling of nukes. only plans for things like gas centrifuges and warhead designs being made available.


The plans are available if you know where to look.

#28 Ekson Valdez

    Volunteer Moderator

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 573 posts

Posted 01 November 2022 - 10:46 PM



This thread has been moved to Off Topic Discussions



#29 simon1812

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 145 posts

Posted 24 November 2022 - 01:21 PM

We are humans...stop overthinking it. It isn't like people are bad or good, people are just people, they can be bad but they can also be good. Sadly, a myriad of factors (like a lot of factors internal and external) will conspire for folks to make a choice one way or the other.

I think this is one of the reason I kinda like the clan's culture (though not a fan of the eugenic aspect), thier ritualized form of wagging war prevented the worst excesses brought for by military conflicts. the same didn't hold true with the succession wars in the innersphere, where casualties and destruction escalated to such levels that have to be toned down because it started to sound like a plot line right out of WH40K.

#30 Escef

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 8,524 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationNew England

Posted 24 November 2022 - 10:28 PM

View PostLordNothing, on 14 October 2022 - 08:46 AM, said:

im not really advocating the buying and selling of nukes. only plans for things like gas centrifuges and warhead designs being made available.


I don't see how there's much of a need for that. Nuclear weapons technology is over 75 years old, and ICBMs over 60. These technologies are closer in time to the Wright Flyer than they are to modern technology (nuclear weapons were first employed 42 years after the first powered flight of a heavier-than-air vehicle, and the ICBM 54 years after said flight).

If a nation as starved of material resources and technical expertise as North Korea can produce nukes and ICBMs, I have no doubt that other political or economic entities could. North Korea has a GDP of approximately $40 billion, Apple Inc.'s yearly profit is more than double that. So, yeah, it is entirely plausible that Apple could develop nuclear weapons if they wanted to. (A quick search finds there are at least 7 companies that turn yearly profits equal to or exceeding North Korea's GDP. Two of which are Chinese banks, four are US tech companies, and the biggest is Saudi Aramco.)

Most countries have little interest in developing nuclear weapons. They're money sinks, and don't provide much in the way of diplomatic, economic, or military benefit. India and Pakistan have had nukes for 30 to 40 years, yet it has done nothing to remedy their claims to Kashmir, nor have their nuclear arsenals done anything to elevate them in international influence. India's modern prominence is due largely to their investment in information technology and their poorly regulated, cheaply operated industrial sector. Meanwhile, Pakistan's lack of significant international standing can be laid squarely at the feet of their internal instability, something that possessing nukes has not helped them with. (In fact, it could be argued that the resources wasted on programs to produce weapons that even they aren't crazy or desperate enough to use would have been better used to bolster the nation's infrastructure and cultivate internal stability.)

The idea that nuclear proliferation could be a good thing because then nations could all threaten one another with them is farcical. It's primitive, SDE thinking that equates destruction with power.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users