Will there be a nuclear strike in your lifetime?

[Anomalocaris]

You're an asshole.

Guilty as charged.  Don't tell vorlon.

---

I don't know. I think it says something that America is the only country who has ever launched one. I don't know if we'll wind up launching another, but we do seem to like starting an getting involved in wars.

I think ever since Hiroshima, America was nearly continuously the most likely side to launches the next nuclear strike.   This follows from its overwhelming nuclear superiority during major parts of the Cold War and for the foreseeable future, the global reach of its military forces, its propensity to get involved in many wars and it's unwillingness to absorb casualties matching those of its opponent.  

During the Cold War, while the soviets were ambigious about whether it would be the first to use nuclear weapons in WWIII, the US made it clear it would be.

Currently America perceive itself has having less to lose and less in danger of crippling retaliation by launching a nuclear strike than any other major power,  have far more opportunity than anyone else to become involved in a diverse range of situations where nuclear weapon might appear to provide an answer, and always have the means to deliver a appropriate nuclear weapon when such an situation arises.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I don't know. I think it says something that America is the only country who has ever launched one. I don't know if we'll wind up launching another, but we do seem to like starting an getting involved in wars.

"Damned if you do, damned if you don't." Whatever we do or don't do will draw criticism from the fat, lame and lazy.

---

You're an asshole.

Guilty as charged.  Don't tell vorlon.

---

I don't know. I think it says something that America is the only country who has ever launched one. I don't know if we'll wind up launching another, but we do seem to like starting an getting involved in wars.

I think ever since Hiroshima, America was nearly continuously the most likely side to launches the next nuclear strike.   This follows from its overwhelming nuclear superiority during major parts of the Cold War and for the foreseeable future, the global reach of its military forces, its propensity to get involved in many wars and it's unwillingness to absorb casualties matching those of its opponent.  

During the Cold War, while the soviets were ambigious about whether it would be the first to use nuclear weapons in WWIII, the US made it clear it would be.

Currently America perceive itself has having less to lose and less in danger of crippling retaliation by launching a nuclear strike than any other major power,  have far more opportunity than anyone else to become involved in a diverse range of situations where nuclear weapon might appear to provide an answer, and always have the means to deliver a appropriate nuclear weapon when such an situation arises.

Expounding on shit you don't understand? Bravo.

[Anomalocaris]

I don't know. I think it says something that America is the only country who has ever launched one. I don't know if we'll wind up launching another, but we do seem to like starting an getting involved in wars.

"Damned if you do, damned if you don't." Whatever we do or don't do will draw criticism from the fat, lame and lazy.

We ought to be damned if launched one because we are fat, lame and lazy.

---

I don't know. I think it says something that America is the only country who has ever launched one. I don't know if we'll wind up launching another, but we do seem to like starting an getting involved in wars.

"Damned if you do, damned if you don't." Whatever we do or don't do will draw criticism from the fat, lame and lazy.

---

Guilty as charged.  Don't tell vorlon.

---

I think ever since Hiroshima, America was nearly continuously the most likely side to launches the next nuclear strike.   This follows from its overwhelming nuclear superiority during major parts of the Cold War and for the foreseeable future, the global reach of its military forces, its propensity to get involved in many wars and it's unwillingness to absorb casualties matching those of its opponent.  

During the Cold War, while the soviets were ambigious about whether it would be the first to use nuclear weapons in WWIII, the US made it clear it would be.

Currently America perceive itself has having less to lose and less in danger of crippling retaliation by launching a nuclear strike than any other major power,  have far more opportunity than anyone else to become involved in a diverse range of situations where nuclear weapon might appear to provide an answer, and always have the means to deliver a appropriate nuclear weapon when such an situation arises.

Expounding on shit you don't understand? Bravo.

Really? Enlighten me.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Nope, I don't care if you understand or not. You're an asshole and nothing will change that.

[vorlon13]

I think the chances of an accidental detonation are higher than most folks appreciate, and as more players get in the game, the odds of one increase. I note Pakistan's deployment scheme (if they are still doing it) is really lame, and even US and former Soviet devices might have components aging in unexpected ways . . .

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I think the chances of an accidental detonation are higher than most folks appreciate, and as more players get in the game, the odds of one increase.  I note Pakistan's deployment scheme (if they are still doing it) is really lame, and even US and former Soviet devices might have components aging in unexpected ways . . .

You have experience in the field?

[Anomalocaris]

I think the chances of an accidental detonation are higher than most folks appreciate, and as more players get in the game, the odds of one increase.  I note Pakistan's deployment scheme (if they are still doing it) is really lame, and even US and former Soviet devices might have components aging in unexpected ways . . .

I think the most likely place of a serious accident involving nuclear weapons resulting from fire, flood riot, poor maintenance, and improper handling is still Russia, on account of the very large number of warheads there, and the far larger financial and organizational effort required to ensure they are all properly accounted for and maintained than smaller arsenals of lesser powers.

The state of dilapidation of critical strategic infrastructure in the former USSR is such that the roof of the hanger housing a mothballed Soviet space shuttle was allowed to deteriorate until it collapsed, destroying the $1 billion shuttle orbitor.  This happened while the Russian space authorities were negotiating with NASA concerning reviving the soviet shuttle in collaboration with the US in the aftermath the Colombia accident.

[LastPoet]

This is all thou coward fucks jerk off about, what about knucles? Poor kids need big guns to prove their worth. Sad. I have "death" and "terror". That is my left and right fist name. Yeah, better nuke it from orbit cowards.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

This is all thou coward fucks jerk off about, what about knucles? Poor kids need big guns to prove their worth. Sad. I have "death" and "terror". That is my left and right fist name. Yeah, better nuke it from orbit cowards.

"Knucles" are the new terror weapons? Knuclear force? 

[Seraphina]

My opinion is driven by Trump asking last year during a foreign policy briefing "If we have them, why can't we use them"?
And also the fact that once a president decides to launch nuclear weapons, there's no protocol for going back or, say, a general jumping in and stopping the whole thing. That only happens in the movies.
With a president who can't even control his own tweets I think there's, sadly, a possibility nuclear weapons will be launched against the US in my lifetime.

-Teresa