(March 23, 2018 at 10:09 am)Anomalocaris Wrote: Nuclear war will never become obsolete unless a new and even more effective weapon technology supersedes it before it could by itself halt the progress of human technology.
Instead it will become ever more likely as the technology to manufacture nuclear weapons, now 75 years old, comes within the reach of more and more nations simply as part of general progress in overall level of technology, and more and more nations will acquire nuclear weapons, making control of nuclear weapon use through effective command and control and international regimes ever more complex and difficult.
Perhaps the most likely future Unclear war would not be a all out exchange of tens of thousands of warheads as per the Cold War scenario. So nuclear war becomes more likely to be survivable. But in place of a single throw of dice, I think nuclear war, while smaller, will likely become more frequent.
The only question is whether, over the long term, humanity will expand its range faster than the rate at which nuclear war can consume the population and infrastructure.
You are missing my point.
I am not talking about the technology itself, I said that it already exists and we cannot turn back the clock.
I am talking about "mutual destruction". Humans have always dreamed up ways to kill, that is bad enough.
I am saying no matter what diplomacy is used, or what war tactic is employed, nobody wins if everybody dies. If our species is wiped out, what was accomplished?
That is what I mean by nuclear war needs to be obsolete. The only people that should be trusted to control them, are the ones who refuse to use them.
