Mutually Assured Destruction
2strokebloke
04-04-2007, 04:49 PM
So here's a thought that passed through my head.
The idea behind mutually assured destruction is basically, that we as humans have nuclear weapons - and we could use them on other countries, but we dare not because if we do other countries would use their nukes on us, and before you know it every country has been nuked and the world and everything on it's surface has been completely destroyed and killed.
I wonder if that would really happen. I wonder, if one country did really wipe out another country - would other countries avenge them, knowing that if they did, they would get nuked, and so on, until all of humanity - every single living thing had been wiped out in the name of revenge?
Do you think any government would instead think about preserving the human race instead of destroying everything for the sake of revenge?
Personally I'm pretty cynical, I know that most individuals would probably murder everybody on earth so they could be right, than save all of humanity by not starting a chain of complete destruction.
The idea behind mutually assured destruction is basically, that we as humans have nuclear weapons - and we could use them on other countries, but we dare not because if we do other countries would use their nukes on us, and before you know it every country has been nuked and the world and everything on it's surface has been completely destroyed and killed.
I wonder if that would really happen. I wonder, if one country did really wipe out another country - would other countries avenge them, knowing that if they did, they would get nuked, and so on, until all of humanity - every single living thing had been wiped out in the name of revenge?
Do you think any government would instead think about preserving the human race instead of destroying everything for the sake of revenge?
Personally I'm pretty cynical, I know that most individuals would probably murder everybody on earth so they could be right, than save all of humanity by not starting a chain of complete destruction.
MonsterBengt
04-05-2007, 01:14 PM
I believe that the next nuke won't be launched by a country, but by some kind of fanatics/terrorists. I mean, when the first two we're dropped, it was a very dramatic and touchy time in history and not so many countries had nukes by then. Now, It is like you explain, very complicated and no one would go unharmed after nuking someone else, unless you're not a country.
Question is, what if a superpower could "lend" a fanatic group of people with the resources they need to nuke a country which they both seek to nuke, but cover it all up afterwards. Or, simply nuke the country and blaim someone else for it.
Question is, what if a superpower could "lend" a fanatic group of people with the resources they need to nuke a country which they both seek to nuke, but cover it all up afterwards. Or, simply nuke the country and blaim someone else for it.
03cavPA
04-06-2007, 06:41 AM
M.A.D. assumes that rational individuals are in charge of the process. No sane person would initiate an action that would guarantee the destruction of everybody and everything.
I agree with monster, the next nuke will most likely be a terrorist weapon. The scary thought is that twitchy fingers might then initiate unfortunate reactions.
I leave it up to everybody else to decide which terrorists it might be. We can't always assume it will be one of the "usual suspects".
I agree with monster, the next nuke will most likely be a terrorist weapon. The scary thought is that twitchy fingers might then initiate unfortunate reactions.
I leave it up to everybody else to decide which terrorists it might be. We can't always assume it will be one of the "usual suspects".
eversio11
04-06-2007, 07:59 PM
I believe that the next nuke won't be launched by a country, but by some kind of fanatics/terrorists. I mean, when the first two we're dropped, it was a very dramatic and touchy time in history and not so many countries had nukes by then. Now, It is like you explain, very complicated and no one would go unharmed after nuking someone else, unless you're not a country.
Question is, what if a superpower could "lend" a fanatic group of people with the resources they need to nuke a country which they both seek to nuke, but cover it all up afterwards. Or, simply nuke the country and blaim someone else for it.
If the US gets nuked by an individual or group, you better believe they'll place the blame on a country just so they have someone to destroy.
Question is, what if a superpower could "lend" a fanatic group of people with the resources they need to nuke a country which they both seek to nuke, but cover it all up afterwards. Or, simply nuke the country and blaim someone else for it.
If the US gets nuked by an individual or group, you better believe they'll place the blame on a country just so they have someone to destroy.
ericn1300
04-06-2007, 09:02 PM
If the US gets nuked by an individual or group, you better believe they'll place the blame on a country just so they have someone to destroy.
I agree. MAD is only applicable to country's with enough nukes to destroy each other and can only happen with early launch dection. if a country with a couple of nukes strikes the US or allows an individual or group to use their weapons then it's SAD. Sorry but your Ass is Destroyed.
I agree. MAD is only applicable to country's with enough nukes to destroy each other and can only happen with early launch dection. if a country with a couple of nukes strikes the US or allows an individual or group to use their weapons then it's SAD. Sorry but your Ass is Destroyed.
mellowboy
04-06-2007, 09:39 PM
If the US gets nuked by an individual or group, you better believe they'll place the blame on a country just so they have someone to destroy.
Definitely agreed to that.
Definitely agreed to that.
eversio11
04-07-2007, 12:10 AM
It's funny how the media portrays muslims as the threat, while the Christian States of America are the ones who invade and pillage lands.
Not to hijack this thread about a theoretical military doctrine or anything :biggrin:
Not to hijack this thread about a theoretical military doctrine or anything :biggrin:
MagicRat
04-30-2007, 09:39 PM
It's funny how the media portrays muslims as the threat, while the Christian States of America are the ones who invade and pillage lands.
Well, American media, anyways.
There are plenty of western media publications elsewhere (Europe, South America) who firmly believe the US is somewhat hazardous to other nations.
Of course, to radical Islamic media, the US is obviously the Great Satan. :wink:
Well, American media, anyways.
There are plenty of western media publications elsewhere (Europe, South America) who firmly believe the US is somewhat hazardous to other nations.
Of course, to radical Islamic media, the US is obviously the Great Satan. :wink:
Automotive Network, Inc., Copyright ©2025