I have posted on ATS regarding what I believe to be a media-blackout regarding nuclear war. Actually, I cannot decide if it is an organized campaign
of ignorance or if people just have massive dissonance when the issue comes up. In any case, nuclear war seems like the most important subject for us
to discuss and it is rarely ever discussed in the media. Why is that?
There's a guy named Ike Jeanes who wrote a book called
. So far as I know, this is the only book to discuss the statistical likelihood of nuclear war and specifically the interrelated
components that determine if a nation will use nukes (or if they will be used by accident). I would be curious to know if anyone here has read this
In the book, the author explains that there are two essential forces that keep nukes in check. There are the known
forces of Deterrence
which determine a people's willingness to strike with nuclear weapons (these two forces comprise the whole of what most people
know about nukes) and then there are the unknown
factors which if they occur, are later called "accidents". The thought in most people's
minds is that, "Since civility and deterrence will prevent nuclear exchange, I have no real reason to be afraid."
In fact, as Ike Jeanes explains, the threat of accident is much greater than people realize. Nuclear weapon accidents are prevented by the so-called
"C3I" structure. C3I stands for Control
. The point is, the factors of
Civility and Deterrence have safeguards and checks involved, but accidents
do not have those same flowcharts because that is the nature of
accidents. In the case of an accidental launch, you have a finite amount of time to figure out what the heck is going on. What is your enemy
thinking when he launches? Do we assume that it is always volitional?
The more I thought about Jeanes' book, the more it changed my priorities and perspectives. How can I possibly plan for a family (I'm 32) in a
country which is the tip of the spear for nuclear weapons and which will probably be decimated in any exchange of such weapons? How can I tell my
young children they are safe when the numbers say they are not? In any case, I am getting sidetracked...
I went into my 3D program and made this model. The objects are based on the statistical analysis method called the "Unified Theory" and which
theory is methodically described within Ike Jeanes' book. I call this thing the AMONC which stands for "Abstract Model of Nuclear Components".
The hammers represent the potential for accident whereas the cables from which this warhead hangs represent the aforementioned factors of Civility and
Deterrence (see Jeanes' book for a detailed discussion of these terms). As you can see, the warhead will not fall so long as either of the cables
remain intact. However this does not really protect the nation/owner of the AMONC because the hammers are always there, waiting to drop and cause an
Please realize that with nuclear proliferation, this problem increases exponentially. Every time we add another nuclear player/nation to the game,
we collectively give birth to another AMONC which must be maintained by that nuclear player/nation.
In a way, a nation which obtains nuclear
weapons gives birth to an AMONC just like a parent bears a child. If your country's AMONC is creaky and falling apart, your nation could be the
trigger for a catastrophic failure of ALL AMONC because all AMONCs are interrelated and reactive to other AMONCs. If such an accidental launch
occurs, the generally accepted rule of Mutually Assured Destruction will escalate the matter quickly.
We have never travelled down the road of nuclear war but we are sure paving it daily.
I am curious to know what you all think of this model and if you have questions or comments. I sent a picture of it to Ike Jeanes and this was his
reply to me via email:
"To deal directly with the subject visually, as you have, is
a stunning and important break from past imagery.
In my view, it is striking that the jpg sample you provided
for me displays the nuclear problem absent the conventional
and somewhat tiresome image of the too familiar nuclear
mushroom cloud. That cloud no longer evokes a fear response.
And even if it did, fear is not a productive motivator."
Naturally this made me feel good but I am wondering what you all think. Am I wasting my time talking about this issue here at ATS?
[edit on 11-5-2005 by smallpeeps]