It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Do You Think It's Only A Matter Of Time Before A Nuclear War Happens??

page: 1

log in


posted on Nov, 4 2006 @ 03:26 PM

I was just thinking and as reading alot of these topics in this forum that if you really think about it with some sound judgement, that its almost a certainty that a war which nuclear warheads will be used will happen.

But of course no 1 can predict the future (without a biblical doctrine, in my opinion),
but if i get in a serious sober sound mind-set i do honestly think that in my life time there will be a nuclear exchange of some sort between a number of country's and i even think it unavoidable, but thats my opinion.

Anyone think that a holocaust is a event that is mainly unavoidable or that peace in the world will be a lasting peace which will endure many generations?

posted on Nov, 4 2006 @ 03:28 PM
I think it's possible. I don't necessarily think it's going to be on the scale that many probably imagine,but it may very well happen. I look for it to be rather localized.

posted on Nov, 4 2006 @ 03:31 PM
The more countries that have nuclear weapons, the high the chance of a conflict going nuclear.

Now when you say nuclear weapons used, do you mean in a war-like Israel VS Iran or do you mean use of nukes to prevent another country from developing/using them???

posted on Nov, 4 2006 @ 03:37 PM

Originally posted by mrmonsoon
The more countries that have nuclear weapons, the high the chance of a conflict going nuclear.


I think we all breathed a sigh of relief when the U.S.S.R. fell, but since then proliferation has brought the world closer to nuclear war than we ever were during the Cold War IMHO.

posted on Nov, 4 2006 @ 03:58 PM
I think another nuclear war is inevitable; however, I don't think any nation would willingly launch dozens of warheads at a target jeopardizing the stability of our ecosystem. Unless, of course, that country was headed by a bunch of fanatics...

Without the threat on mutual destruction as was the case with the USA and USSR, the detenation of a nuclear device is much more likely.

posted on Nov, 4 2006 @ 04:06 PM
Short answer; YUP

With the now readily apparent faults in the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty, a toothless IAEA and the UN unwilling to do the job it was created for - nuclear war is almost if not completely unavoidable.

I can't tell what form it will take but its going to happen.

posted on Nov, 5 2006 @ 01:10 PM
A war in the form of large nations with multiple warheads exchanging vollies of missiles? Low probability. The only nations with large nuclear arsenals are relatively stable with no singular madman in control. Too much to lose and nothing to gain. Even the Soviet military planners at the height of the Cold War knew that a major nuclear exchange with the U.S. would lose for them. The U.S. would win (perhaps a pyrrhic victory, but still win). The U.S. lead over all and any other nations has expanded since then.

A rogue state with one or two nuclear weapons and a nut job in charge (N. Korea, Iran, possibly Pakistan if Musharraf loses power) attacking a western target -- increasingly possible.

They don't even need a missile delivery system. A nuclear weapon can easily be put inside a cargo container on a container ship and sailed into NY harbor undetected, to be detonated by a volunteer suicide bomber -- no shortage of those.

A dark and scary scenario.

posted on Nov, 5 2006 @ 01:26 PM
As dave said, nations with reliable weapons have too much too lose, which of course is why the USSR never attacked the USA or vice versa, hence the term cold war.

But yes a rogue state that can deliver a nuclear weapon could be dangerous the problem is I don't think that rogue state would be fully aware of the consequences.

If say Iran or North Korea provided a nuclear device to a terrorist cell; that terrorist cell then detonates that device on either US soil or on a US target; that device is eventually traced back to the nation that created and sold the technology to the cell...that country most likely would glow for a very long time.

The only response by the united states if someone detonates or launches a random nuke in our direction would be to launch enough nukes (and with us one will most likely be enough, though we probably wouldn't stop there) at that country so that everyone understands that once you escalate to nuclear weaponry you better be willing to pay the ultimate cost.

Basically the simple message is, we've got a lot more of these than you, ours are better, more powerful more accurate and now we're really, really mad.

I can honestly say that the fool who detonates or attempts to detonate a nuclear device at an american target will in fact creat the great satan they so fear and loathe.

Gone will be the days of discretionary attacks, or worrying about civilian casualties and public opinion.

It will be a dark and scary world indeed.

This goes for any country of course, don't think China, Great Britain or India would react differently...russia too if their arsenal hasn't fallen into complete disrepair.

Again just my opinion of what would happen.

Will it happen, well I like to think the chances are slim to none but then again that might just be my denial kicking in so I don't completely freak out.


posted on Nov, 5 2006 @ 01:27 PM
Perhap's we are past the Nuclear War type scenario, but when I come across info such as President Putin's (ex KGB) apparent plan after office 2008:

I begin to feel a lost nuke from a Nuclear Power and Security Council member can happen. That it can fall into the terrorist community who don't care about dieing only it's delivery to the target. Or some Leader wannabe having made a crack-pot nuc for pipeline delivery to, what he feels is, an unfavourable Nation. Or any other WMD he can get his hands-on.


top topics


log in