Nukes: post your imagined scenario of the next war

[WinterHold]

Grim, dark imagination  can take the mind to strange places. But the worst section of these grim thoughts is the section decorated by blood and mass murder.

This section in the mind springs from the geopolitical situation of the world,  the de-facto alliance between different factions and the map of atomic weapon distribution. 

So who will fight who? the question is too broad because there are too many holders of atomic weapons in the world, but one thing is certain: once the first bomb/missile detonates; there is no peace or turning back. The aftermath of a single bomb is too huge, and the chain reaction of response will bring the demise of all involved parts.

For example, it can be North Korea firing at Japan. The USA would join to defend its interests in Japan, China would join North Korea, Putin would join to defend China... down to the smallest country in the Middle East; the world will turn into a hell hole just like that.

The following link is a nuclear map that calculates the estimated casualties resulting from a nuke explosion of your choice; see the disaster yourself of a bomb exploding in one of the world's capitals:

https://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/

Post your imagined scenario for the beginning of the next world war. You might be saving all of earth if you guessed right based on facts; nobody knows the future but..hey it's better than sitting with my mouth shut about it, knowing that every political system in the world is proud to own such a lethal, filthy firecracker produced by a filthy group of people with no honor or humanity.

[Brian37]

Grim, dark imagination  can take the mind to strange places. But the worst section of these grim thoughts is the section decorated by blood and mass murder.

This section in the mind springs from the geopolitical situation of the world,  the de-facto alliance between different factions and the map of atomic weapon distribution. 

So who will fight who? the question is too broad because there are too many holders of atomic weapons in the world, but one thing is certain: once the first bomb/missile detonates; there is no peace or turning back. The aftermath of a single bomb is too huge, and the chain reaction of response will bring the demise of all involved parts.

For example, it can be North Korea firing at Japan. The USA would join to defend its interests in Japan, China would join North Korea, Putin would join to defend China... down to the smallest country in the Middle East; the world will turn into a hell hole just like that.

The following link is a nuclear map that calculates the estimated casualties resulting from a nuke explosion of your choice; see the disaster yourself of a bomb exploding in one of the world's capitals:

https://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/

Post your imagined scenario for the beginning of the next world war. You might be saving all of earth if you guessed right based on facts; nobody knows the future but..hey it's better than sitting with my mouth shut about it, knowing that every political system in the world is proud to own such a lethal, filthy firecracker produced by a filthy group of people with no honor or humanity.

I don't think it will matter who starts it, friend or foe.

Global warming will be the biggest trigger no matter who starts it.

Humans need resources. The more extreme weather effects all parts of the globe, the harder it becomes to get them. The harder it becomes to get them, the more political unrest causes a given society to blame their own government and or other countries. 

I will say, it wont matter who starts a global nuclear war. Once everyone fires in all directions, humanity will be lucky if it survives. And even if we do, it will knock us back into the stone age to the point, if we survive, to killing our neighbors for food and resources.

[WinterHold]

I don't think it will matter who starts it, friend or foe.

Global warming will be the biggest trigger no matter who starts it.

Humans need resources. The more extreme weather effects all parts of the globe, the harder it becomes to get them. The harder it becomes to get them, the more political unrest causes a given society to blame their own government and or other countries. 

I will say, it wont matter who starts a global nuclear war. Once everyone fires in all directions, humanity will be lucky if it survives. And even if we do, it will knock us back into the stone age to the point, if we survive, to killing our neighbors for food and resources.

The need for resources will make alliances and loyalties swing from north to south. I don't think anybody would survive a nuclear winter+global warming mixed together. It will be our extinction; or so I think.

---

Isn't the nuclear winter a type of global warming? but instead of temperature rising, it is dropping. Or the clouds from the explosions will block the sun rays, but the heat our planet held would never go out, so earth would become one big oven.

[Yonadav]

I see you guys are already talking nuclear winter. The scenario that I was going to post is that some especially insane environmentalists get the idea that a limited nuclear exchange will cause a mild nuclear winter and drastically reduce the global population. So they start agitating tension between Pakistan and India to get that result.

[Brian37]

I don't think it will matter who starts it, friend or foe.

Global warming will be the biggest trigger no matter who starts it.

Humans need resources. The more extreme weather effects all parts of the globe, the harder it becomes to get them. The harder it becomes to get them, the more political unrest causes a given society to blame their own government and or other countries. 

I will say, it wont matter who starts a global nuclear war. Once everyone fires in all directions, humanity will be lucky if it survives. And even if we do, it will knock us back into the stone age to the point, if we survive, to killing our neighbors for food and resources.

The need for resources will make alliances and loyalties swing from north to south. I don't think anybody would survive a nuclear winter+global warming mixed together. It will be our extinction; or so I think.

---

Isn't the nuclear winter a type of global warming? but instead of temperature rising, it is dropping. Or the clouds from the explosions will block the sun rays, but the heat our planet held would never go out, so earth would become one big oven.

Not the point.

The term "nuclear winter" does have to do with blocking out the sun. But the mass initial death will be from vaporizing humans at ground zero. That will also knock out communication and transportation. The next worry would be radiation of food sources and water. Mega volcanos have caused climate change too. Blocking out the sun, on top of the radiation will kill off lots of food sources, on top of the radiation.

Instead of speculating who will start what, how about offering up solutions to avoid what nobody in humanity should want.

---

I see you guys are already talking nuclear winter. The scenario that I was going to post is that some especially insane environmentalists get the idea that a limited nuclear exchange will cause a mild nuclear winter and drastically reduce the global population. So they start agitating tension between Pakistan and India to get that result.

For someone who claims to have voted for Obama, you sure talk like a libertarian.

Global warming is not  hoax. It is fact. It is not insane to want to protect the only home all 7 billion of us live on.

A nuclear war WILL NOT be limited. It will be a domino effect.  There are approximately 14,500 nuclear weapons from both friend and foe alike worldwide.

It may not kill us to the point of extinction, although I think it could. But at a minimum it would be global, and would knock humanity, if we survived initially, to the point of killing our neighbors for resources.

"Insane environmentalists" Yea, why would I want pesky things like clean water, clean food, and less drastic weather?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

The map doesn't load on the link.

Boru

[Gawdzilla Sama]

The map doesn't load on the link.

Boru

It must not like you.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

The map doesn't load on the link.

Boru

It must not like you.

It should take a number, then. 

Boru

[Brian37]

The map doesn't load on the link.

Boru

It must not like you.

Just kidding in my response here, but it does remind me of this.