Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Strategic Nuclear Weapons Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: What happens to the world if 1 nuke is used?
GOP    9/12/2004 4:41:16 PM
If America hit's China in retaliation for a invasion of Taiwan (not likely), let's say in Beijing, what happens to China and the rest of the world? I don't know the different sizes of Nuke's, but let say a very powerful ICBM.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2 3   NEXT
elcid    RE:What happens to the world if 1 nuke is used?   9/12/2004 5:18:00 PM
Your scenario is not the likely one. For one thing, the era of the doctrine of massive retaliation ended in the early 1950s. [President Eisenhauer did indeed threaten to use nw over Taiwan. But according to McGeorge Bundy in Danger and Survival, it was purely bluff - Ike "never intended to let matters reach the point he had to make a decision." Ike himself seems to have evolved his views of these weapons, from "they are just like a (conventional) bullet" to "they are unacceptable to use" over time. Today his visionary Open Skies policy - long thought to be impractical - looks a lot better (because we have been doing it with the Russians for about a decade now). But your question is indeed germane. For one thing, a Chinese general threatened to "nuke LA" if the USA supported Taiwan. He seems to have got into trouble for that, and PRC certainly didn't "nuke LA" when Clinton sent two carriers to support Taiwan. But there are some articles in the Chinese military and trade press indicating consideration of EMP strikes and use of nw against carrier task forces at sea. Even more likely is a nuclear war between India and Pakistan. And more likely still is a terrorist strike - particularly in the USA. Lybia's leader is convinced we are going to lose New York or DC, and he felt we would react strongly - which is why he invited us to take all his wmd - and documents. [He turned over a plan for an atomic bomb - in Chinese! - in case anyone thinks China had no role in the Islamic Bomb.] What happens in the case of a nuclear weapon use in this era? I believe the world will change, politically. All this nonsense about nuclear weapons are acceptable is going to seem quite silly. Politicians who say that are going to have a hard time staying in office. The US (and other nuclear power) double standard itself may come in for revision. [India long claimed the USA had a "double standard of sovereignty - it is OK for some nations to have these weapons and not for others." And India is formally right. That is our official position.] But it may be that something like China's minimum deterrence policy will be acceptable - because many cannot think of an alternative. [There are alternatives. Nuclear weapons are not really useful in a military sense. And after the public understands what their use means, and that it is possible instead of a vague but never experienced theory, it is likely they will be a big political problem.] At the least you can expect the non-proliferation regime to be enforced - and greatly strengthened. But since the US, Russia, UK and France are all engaged in a build down, it is likely this will accelerate, until all approach China's level. There is a cross party and cross disciplinary consensus that the world does not benefit from tens of thousands of nuclear weapons. And there is a great risk they can be stolen. [I remember how poorly the USN guarded them long ago - before they were removed from most ships. We almost lost nuclear rounds at least once.] Reducing the numbers greatly reduces the risk, not to mention the cost to build, maintain and secure. But there is NO consensus on what happens when the USA and Russia get well below 1,000 warheads? While a nuclear weapon on CNN is going to alter the political landscape in a big way, its impact is not clear because I believe many experts will recommend retaining a minimum capability. But that might exist in the form of the "Swedish Solution" (no assembled weapons - actually it should be called "Truman's solution" because he did it first - the first US arsenal was 50 bombs not assembled and not in military custody. More likely, SSBNs will go to single warheads, and maybe some conventional rounds, which the UK already has.] No matter what the big powers do, bet no other nations will be able to join the nuclear club. Bet big on that.
 
Quote    Reply

elcid    RE:What happens to the world if 1 nuke is used?   9/12/2004 5:18:24 PM
Your scenario is not the likely one. For one thing, the era of the doctrine of massive retaliation ended in the early 1950s. [President Eisenhauer did indeed threaten to use nw over Taiwan. But according to McGeorge Bundy in Danger and Survival, it was purely bluff - Ike "never intended to let matters reach the point he had to make a decision." Ike himself seems to have evolved his views of these weapons, from "they are just like a (conventional) bullet" to "they are unacceptable to use" over time. Today his visionary Open Skies policy - long thought to be impractical - looks a lot better (because we have been doing it with the Russians for about a decade now). But your question is indeed germane. For one thing, a Chinese general threatened to "nuke LA" if the USA supported Taiwan. He seems to have got into trouble for that, and PRC certainly didn't "nuke LA" when Clinton sent two carriers to support Taiwan. But there are some articles in the Chinese military and trade press indicating consideration of EMP strikes and use of nw against carrier task forces at sea. Even more likely is a nuclear war between India and Pakistan. And more likely still is a terrorist strike - particularly in the USA. Lybia's leader is convinced we are going to lose New York or DC, and he felt we would react strongly - which is why he invited us to take all his wmd - and documents. [He turned over a plan for an atomic bomb - in Chinese! - in case anyone thinks China had no role in the Islamic Bomb.] What happens in the case of a nuclear weapon use in this era? I believe the world will change, politically. All this nonsense about nuclear weapons are acceptable is going to seem quite silly. Politicians who say that are going to have a hard time staying in office. The US (and other nuclear power) double standard itself may come in for revision. [India long claimed the USA had a "double standard of sovereignty - it is OK for some nations to have these weapons and not for others." And India is formally right. That is our official position.] But it may be that something like China's minimum deterrence policy will be acceptable - because many cannot think of an alternative. [There are alternatives. Nuclear weapons are not really useful in a military sense. And after the public understands what their use means, and that it is possible instead of a vague but never experienced theory, it is likely they will be a big political problem.] At the least you can expect the non-proliferation regime to be enforced - and greatly strengthened. But since the US, Russia, UK and France are all engaged in a build down, it is likely this will accelerate, until all approach China's level. There is a cross party and cross disciplinary consensus that the world does not benefit from tens of thousands of nuclear weapons. And there is a great risk they can be stolen. [I remember how poorly the USN guarded them long ago - before they were removed from most ships. We almost lost nuclear rounds at least once.] Reducing the numbers greatly reduces the risk, not to mention the cost to build, maintain and secure. But there is NO consensus on what happens when the USA and Russia get well below 1,000 warheads? While a nuclear weapon on CNN is going to alter the political landscape in a big way, its impact is not clear because I believe many experts will recommend retaining a minimum capability. But that might exist in the form of the "Swedish Solution" (no assembled weapons - actually it should be called "Truman's solution" because he did it first - the first US arsenal was 50 bombs not assembled and not in military custody. More likely, SSBNs will go to single warheads, and maybe some conventional rounds, which the UK already has.] No matter what the big powers do, bet no other nations will be able to join the nuclear club. Bet big on that.
 
Quote    Reply

GOP    RE:What happens to the world if 1 nuke is used?   9/12/2004 10:48:58 PM
What would happen physically? Would 3/4 of China (example) have Lukemia (I have heard that happening)? Would a fourth of Russia have some form of Cancer?
 
Quote    Reply

displacedjim    RE:What happens to the world if 1 nuke is used?   9/13/2004 1:04:27 AM
"What would happen physically? Would 3/4 of China (example) have Lukemia (I have heard that happening)? Would a fourth of Russia have some form of Cancer?" -- GOP --- Who's been feeding you that stuff? Okay, if for some reason one RV from an American ICBM detonated over Beijing, my semi-educated guess of results is as follows: one Mk12A at 340Kt (which is somewhat smaller than the typical Chinese ICBM RV, by the way) detonating at 1500ft altitude would utterly destroy one-half a square mile at ground zero, incinerate/smash just about everything within one square mile, killing most everyone by direct radiation/heat/resulting fire, effectively destroy all construction within a couple square miles around ground zero and killing many of the people due to direct exposure to the blast/thermal radiation if outdoors and many others due to resulting widespread fire, and severely damage structures for several more square miles around ground zero outside of the above. I really have no idea of how densely populated Beijing is, or how much difference it would make depending on just where this nuke detonated over the city, but I'm sure we're talking about a couple hundred thousand dead within 24 hours and a couple hundred thousand more wothin a couple weeks as even if this one nuke is an isolated occurance I'm sure it would still overburden the available medical care facilities and many of the injured will die who might otherwise survive with sufficient treatment and care. Down the road about 10-40 years probably another couple hundred thousand deaths could be considered to be caused to occur prematurely due to radiation-induced illnesses. Anyone who thinks they're at least somewhat informed on nuclear blast effects feel free to correct my semi-wag estimates. Displacedjim
 
Quote    Reply

GOP    RE:What happens to the world if 1 nuke is used?   9/13/2004 4:11:13 PM
Sorry, I am no expert at all
 
Quote    Reply

hybrid    RE:What happens to the world if 1 nuke is used?   9/14/2004 5:13:28 AM
"What happens in the case of a nuclear weapon use in this era? I believe the world will change, politically. All this nonsense about nuclear weapons are acceptable is going to seem quite silly" I'm not too sure about your scenario Elcid, mainly because of a US population response to a detonation in a US or somewhere else on the mainland (or possibly even on a CBG). The US population may just get angry enough to demand that whoevers in office take whatever necessary steps to insure that such an act never happens again which for at least the short term would INCLUDE making MORE nukes (or at least more warheads). Quite possibly the threshold level of which such warheads will be used will be lowered to even tactical attacks. I wouldn't want to see such a thing happen, but it wouldn't surprise me if that was the outcome.
 
Quote    Reply

kjetski    RE:What happens to the world if 1 nuke is used?   10/27/2004 6:32:53 PM
Who cares? They are Commies
 
Quote    Reply

glenponder    RE:What happens to the world if 1 nuke is used?   10/27/2004 6:40:26 PM
The also dont have a choice about weather they are "commie". Remember they dont have a say in what their government does and if memory serves they didnt even vote in the chinese communist party.
 
Quote    Reply

Yimmy    RE:What happens to the world if 1 nuke is used?   10/27/2004 6:48:29 PM
I have not read this thread, nor do I need to, as anybody who has seen Doctor Strange Love, or How I learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb, already knows the answer. How deep is -your- mine shaft??
 
Quote    Reply

Nanheyangrouchuan    swapping full blown nukes for neutron bombs   10/28/2004 5:18:50 PM
What could be a possible international consensus to replace the more destrcutive nukes with more "humane" nuetron bombs as a method of minimal deterrence?
 
Quote    Reply
1 2 3   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics