The Threat of a Nuclear War

Hi all,

I’ve been hearing a lot about the nuclear advances of countries such as Iran and North Korea but what I’d like to know is what country you think poses the greatest threat of launching a nuclear strike.

I’d like to hear your comments on this subject and perhaps an explanation to your vote. What makes them the greatest threat? What’s your case? Where’s your proof?

I’m tired of hearing this subject via the unclarity of politicians and the media so I’d like to know what normal people think.

Korea’s been a hot spot for about the past year now when it comes to Nuclear weapons, though it could be unlikely they will launch a nuclear missle they are communist and have things all ready to go so any threat would likely be from the Koreans.

I would vote for Israel. They are more likely to take pre-emptive strikes on Iran when it is confirmed they have Nukes. Look what happened to Iraqs nuclear reactor back in the 80’s. North Korea is more of the black mail type setting off nukes won’t get them anything except a whole bunch of military action from the U.S. or China. Which they can not win and N. Korea’s dictatorsknows this.

Does the United Kingdom even have nukes? I thought they like destroyed all theirs or something like that…

I don’t think the UK had anything with nukes, but I do know the US where I live had a ton of nukes when the cold war was over and destroyed most of them with the remaining ones tucked away never to be used.

yeah i think we do still have nukes in a silo off the coast of north scotland near some shallow sea bed, well something like that.( DO NOT believe anything Blair says!)lol

LOL United States…
You guys better watch out, we’re gonna blow you up!

yeah i know we in the U.S. are just dying to use our nuclear weapons … LOL, who thinks that and why?

The United States has no reason at all to use nukes, if anything, we’re the least likely. With the most advanced conventional warfare equipment in the world no one is any match for us unless THEY use nukes, or arbitrarily, terror. The countries who are most violently opposed have no large target location that would justify using a nuke, unless Bush finally gets sick of looking for Bin and decides to cluster bomb Afghanistan’s mountains. I laugh at whatever naive people voted that…

Yeah those communist countries are nuking people all the time! Look at all of the historical examples, for instance. I heard that commies are born with horns and red eyes and that they set fire to bibles and puppies in the streets. Both at once! :< :< :<

I think Korea is a little guy in the scale of the world and knows it. Kim Jong decided that if they flexed their muscles a little that maybe we’d pay more attention, but it isn’t going to happen. If they nuke us, they’ll have hell to pay and they know it. Any threat he has is a ploy for patriotism, because if he actually believes it would work he’s as dumb as the old Iraqi information minister.

Sure the US has reasons to use nukes. The current government there is begging the public to see it there way when they come up with one: Pre-emptive strikes in Iraq, Iran and N.Korea because they won’t disarm. Next Anyone who get’s in Bush’s way gets a nuke. I could laugh and think it’s funny, but it’s a nervous laugh.

The United States has no reason at all to use nukes, if anything, we’re the least likely. With the most advanced conventional warfare equipment in the world no one is any match for us unless THEY use nukes, or arbitrarily, terror.
Isn’t this sort of thing going on all the time?

ok i voted the US, not because i necisarily think that they will be 100% in the wrong. but because i think that the next nuclear war will be between the US and another nation.

North korea, vs, US
China, vs, US
iran, vs, US

i think that north korea vs the US is a likely scenario (if anyone ever does consider using the weapons which i highly doubt anyone would do, coz its stupid)

but basicly i think that the US will be involved nomatter what the circumstances are, or who its with.

hence my reply.

the US has 2000+ known nuclear warheads, most nuclear countrys, have in the two figure - low 3 figure range. I.E. 130 or so per country.

the only exception might be russia who built up a large amount with the cold war. but russia has been dismantelling them faster than the US (due to imposed restrictions/ threats of them)


I don’t understand your POV, and what do you mean by, “Isn’t this sort of thing going on all the time?”

There would be no need for nukes in a takeover of any of those countries. A pre-emptive strike would be patriot missles taking out all of their nuke facilities (which wouldn’t be a nuclear explosion, though messy). Nukes wipe out a huge civilian population and the US has plenty of precision equipment to take out only the necessary targets (provided that their operators are competant). I shouldn’t need to go into why wiping out a civilian population wouldn’t help, unless you want to argue that all of a civilian population would need to be exterminated.

:o wow… I’m impressed! you didn’t got israel to this yet… DARN! shouldn’t have mentioned that!

Israel has enough nuclear bombs to blow up the entire world…


The United Kingdom does have quite a few nukes. The majority of them are aboard the Vanguard class nuclear submarines. They have four of these submarines.

Each of these submarines carries 16 nuclear missles (Trident II D5 missiles I think). Each missile can split up in the upper atmosphere and release multiple nuclear warheads.

It is well known that the US and UK have been trading nukes and nuclear technologies with each other for quite some time (e.g the Trident nuclear missile system)

Mmhh I think it’s the USA which says to all countries on the whole world: “you may not have nuclear weapons” but secretly prepare to take over the world :stuck_out_tongue: And Korea saying: “we’re blowing up mountains” actually they blow up villages with people that won’t listen to the communism laws :stuck_out_tongue:

Afther all I think Russia has the biggest of all, because lat time when the terrorist blow up the school there, russia told: “we’ll find them, and w’re not afraid to use heavy and nuclear weapons”

So little scarry here in europe, west, east and north east are having some serious stuff out there :-?

None of these countries, will ever use nuclear weapons (not unless they are attacked first ofcourse, but the question is from whom), because simply there is no reason for that…

The reason is that I agree with shbaz, countries that possess nuclear capabilities in their arsenal, also have far more advanced conventional weapons that can do the job pretty well, so actually they don’t need to use nucs…

However, there is a risk of someone using nuclear weapons, but it has nothing to do with what you imagine here…

The most immediate danger, comes from terrorist groups. Actually constructing a “dirty bomb” is something anybody can do (with some plastic explosives and a few mgramms of radioactive material) and it can be placed pretty much anywhere (parks, football stadiums, commercial centres, etc.). The explosion of such a device, though it can’t wipe out the entire population, can still cause some casualties and (most important) contaminate a very large area, causing chaos and panic among the people…

the main threat comes from bombs from the sovjet union that are lost. it would be horrible if an atomic bomb explodes in new york or an onther large city. let a suitcase bomb explode in a harbour and you have a huge economy loss.

i dont think that countries will use atomic bombs to deystroy things. they will be used as a defense mechanism. (if you nuke us we will make your country as flat as a pancake).

nuclear weapons are a deterrant, nobody will use them unless they have no choice, as all they would get back is more nukes. This would then drag in more countries and further launches.

This is what the UK is doing:

The United Kingdom does not have an offensive chemical or biological weapons programme. The UK decided to abandon its offensive CW programme in 1956, whilst offensive BW research had ended by the late 1950s. The UK is a State Party to the disarmament Conventions, the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention, and the Chemical Weapons Convention - and has always played a leading role in the ongoing efforts to reduce the risk of their proliferation.

China, France, Russia, the UK and the US are the only recognised Nuclear Weapons States under the NPT. Article VI of the NPT committed the Nuclear Weapons States to work towards nuclear disarmament. The Final Document of the 2000 NPT Review Conference referred to, among other issues, an unequivocal political undertaking ‘to accomplish the total elimination of their nuclear arsenals leading to nuclear disarmament to which all States parties are committed under Article VI’ of the NPT.

hence why the idea of a nuclear war is so scary.

and the brits are the smartest.

IMO the only way to live in peace is if everyone trys to lead by example. a peace in which people are uneasily afraid of everyone else is not peace, but one which they trust each other is.