There is something like 17,300 nuclear warheads floating about in the world. The prospect of any one of those warheads---or any weapon of mass destruction really---being used on human beings is terrifying when you stop and think about it. It's as if the fate of the world as we know it lies in a fairly delicate balance, at the mercy of the moods and ambitions of some unnamed persons. It seems like there was a lot of hysteria over nuclear bombs during the Cold War... and that seems to have faded completely except for an occasional and almost mechanical invocation in political rhetoric. Is the hope of complete disarmament dead?

Complete disarmament will never happen. It's a hopeless fantasy. It would be nice if the damned things were never invented but they were and they are here to stay.

With that said, I don't think about it much. If one goes off there's nothing I can do about it.

Well if i am incinerated from the initial explosion no
If i am alive my first thought being i need a geiger counter or else you know
ill be glowing green.

Yes it does scare me, but I'm usually paranoid about anything because otherwise my life would be boring.

Snakes spook me to no end, but nukes, not so much. In fact, I like looking at Youtubes of mushroom clouds and such. I think the old Emergency Broadcast System spooked me more.

It probably doesn't scare any of us as much as it should, but I'm not going to get paranoid over it. We have fewer of the weapons in the world now than we did at the height of the cold war and fewer tensions amongst those possessing them. That's why we don't fear them as much as we used to. On the other hand, we have many more crazies, much closer to either developing their own, or buying/stealing one than we've ever had before. That's why we should be more worried than we are.

All that being said, you can only maintain fear for so long.

I don't think the chance of nuclear war between big powers is significant right now. The great nuclear powers know losing any economic or geopolitical struggle does not mean the end of their nation or the end of their way of life, therefore there is no need to risk nuclear holocaust to avert some disasterous economic or geopolitical outcome.

The greatest threat to this current happy stability is IMHO the United States, not Iran, North Korea, Russia or China. The reason is not just that we have 7000 wars heads. It is the fact that, as the Iraqi and Ukrainian crisis shows, the United states is still stuck in a self-righteous post-Cold War triumphalist mindset which suggests to it that nothing it desires is either morally wrong, or is really beyond its reach if it were to only push aside such niceties as respecting other major countries's security interests, and shove other major powers against a wall and box them in. We are than idiotically surprised when the other country reacts violently. This is the mind set which can convince other countries that losing an economic or geopolitical struggle with the U.S. would be so unacceptably damaging to its own nationhood or way of life that risking nuclear war to thwart the U.S. is an acceptable trade off.

My greatest fear is that we get another "holy crusader" type president like G.W. who decides "Fuck it. Nuke those Muslim bastards."

I would not be the least surprised if the thought crossed Bush's poor excuse for a mind at one point or other. Nor would it surprise me to hear that a top advisor had to talk him out of giving the order.

In other words from my post yes and no. Yes meaning it would be the beginning of the end here on earth.
No if the people on mars colony is doing fine without us well being here anymore. Because you know life finds a way.
But considering that is if granted Mars colony can be self sustainable and go on without us.

It scares me, there just isn't much I can do about it.