Author Topic: The Global Impact of a Limited Nuclear War in South Asia: Famine, Disease and War  (Read 886 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

SPQR

  • Guest

SPQR

  • Guest
This could also be placed in the science section

Offline Chieftain

  • AMF, YOYO
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 9,633
  • Your what hurts??
My wife's uncle was a technical adviser to the publisher of "The Effects of Nuclear Weapons", and he gave me a copy of the latest edition when he was here at Thanksgiving.  I've been reading through it and it is sobering, to say the least....


Offline Oceander

  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 48,946
  • TBR Illuminati
Some of the assumptions seem questionable.  First, some writings - from organizations that don't have an interest in twisting the facts to suit a political agenda - indicate that neither India nor Pakistan has the types of weapons necessary to detonate 100 15 kiloton devices (here's one source).  Second, the assumption doesn't take any account of the likelihood that India and Pakistan would launch their weapons in waves, as opposed to all at once at the onset of hostilities, and therefore that a significant number of their available weapons may be destroyed before they can be used.

I'm not saying that such a war would not have catastrophic consequences, just that the study's conclusions are suspect because the assumptions the study is based on are suspect.

SPQR

  • Guest
Some of the assumptions seem questionable.  First, some writings - from organizations that don't have an interest in twisting the facts to suit a political agenda - indicate that neither India nor Pakistan has the types of weapons necessary to detonate 100 15 kiloton devices (here's one source).  Second, the assumption doesn't take any account of the likelihood that India and Pakistan would launch their weapons in waves, as opposed to all at once at the onset of hostilities, and therefore that a significant number of their available weapons may be destroyed before they can be used.

I'm not saying that such a war would not have catastrophic consequences, just that the study's conclusions are suspect because the assumptions the study is based on are suspect.

If anyone wants to see a sobering view of a nuclear war see this movie. It will change your mind:



<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MCbTvoNrAg" target="_blank" class="aeva_link bbc_link new_win">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MCbTvoNrAg</a>

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFwbDd4lEa8" target="_blank" class="aeva_link bbc_link new_win">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFwbDd4lEa8</a>

« Last Edit: December 14, 2013, 12:46:03 AM by SPQR »

Offline Oceander

  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 48,946
  • TBR Illuminati
If anyone wants to see a sobering view of a nuclear war see this movie> It will change your mind:



<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MCbTvoNrAg" target="_blank" class="aeva_link bbc_link new_win">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MCbTvoNrAg</a>




Why would it change my mind?  I don't think a nuclear war is something to wish for, nor something that would be a walk in the park; however, neither do I think it would be as earth-shattering (pardon the pun) as the doomsayers would have it - especially when they have political axes to grind.  The group Physicians for Social Responsibility is not a collection of scientists, it is a political action group; the mere fact that its members are scientists in their other lives is irrelevant to the political - hence unscientific - nature of the group and its positions.

SPQR

  • Guest
Why would it change my mind?  I don't think a nuclear war is something to wish for, nor something that would be a walk in the park; however, neither do I think it would be as earth-shattering (pardon the pun) as the doomsayers would have it - especially when they have political axes to grind.  The group Physicians for Social Responsibility is not a collection of scientists, it is a political action group; the mere fact that its members are scientists in their other lives is irrelevant to the political - hence unscientific - nature of the group and its positions.

Just watch the movie and judge for yourself. There is no happy ending like "The Day After"It gives an entirely different perspective of a nuclear war movie.
« Last Edit: December 14, 2013, 12:41:10 AM by SPQR »

Offline Oceander

  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 48,946
  • TBR Illuminati
Just watch the movie and judge for yourself. There is no happy ending like "The Day After"It gives an entirely different perspective of a nuclear war movie.

Nope.  Doesn't change my perspective all that much.  Like I said, a nuclear war is no walk in the park.  Then again, neither was Dresden, or Tokyo, or Stalingrad; none of those involved nuclear weapons.  War is hell, no matter what toys you use to play it.

SPQR

  • Guest
Nope.  Doesn't change my perspective all that much.  Like I said, a nuclear war is no walk in the park.  Then again, neither was Dresden, or Tokyo, or Stalingrad; none of those involved nuclear weapons.  War is hell, no matter what toys you use to play it.
.
You just do not want to have your horizons expanded .You can't see a nuclear war movie if Threads is involved. Just see the movie. Humor me please.
« Last Edit: December 14, 2013, 12:53:06 AM by SPQR »

Offline Oceander

  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 48,946
  • TBR Illuminati
. Just see the movie. Humor me please.

I did.  I'm not going to sit through all two hours of it; skimming through it was more than sufficient.  It doesn't materially change my view on nuclear war or the use of nuclear weapons.

SPQR

  • Guest
I did.  I'm not going to sit through all two hours of it; skimming through it was more than sufficient.  It doesn't materially change my view on nuclear war or the use of nuclear weapons.

Its your prerogative. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink

Offline Oceander

  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 48,946
  • TBR Illuminati
Its your prerogative. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink

And your point is?  That nuclear war is terrible?  You'll get no disagreement from me on that point.  Conventional war is hell on Earth too.

SPQR

  • Guest
And your point is?  That nuclear war is terrible?  You'll get no disagreement from me on that point.  Conventional war is hell on Earth too.

again,You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink

Offline Oceander

  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 48,946
  • TBR Illuminati
again,You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink

If you aren't going to state the point in some detail, then there isn't any water there as far as this horse is concerned.

SPQR

  • Guest
If you aren't going to state the point in some detail, then there isn't any water there as far as this horse is concerned.

You are making judgements on a film you have not seen. There are many films I have not seen but I do not make judgements on them. I make judgements after the fact.
« Last Edit: December 14, 2013, 01:04:08 AM by SPQR »

Offline Oceander

  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 48,946
  • TBR Illuminati
You are making judgements on a film you have not seen

No.  I'm asking you to tell me what lesson I'm supposed to draw from this movie.

SPQR

  • Guest
No.  I'm asking you to tell me what lesson I'm supposed to draw from this movie.

That is what you supposed to decide as the viewer. I cannot make that decision. I have already made my judgement because I have seen it(more than once).
« Last Edit: December 14, 2013, 01:26:56 AM by SPQR »


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf