Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Xolodno

(6,330 posts)
Mon May 16, 2016, 05:28 PM May 2016

Simulate the End of the World With This Interactive Map of U.S. Nuclear Targets

From Popular Mechanics

With President Obama visiting Hiroshima and the Republican frontrunner calling for Japan and South Korea to arm themselves with nuclear weapons, the specter of atomic warfare is just about as present as its ever been. A new website from The Future of Life Institute shows-with brutal efficiency-what the fallout from an American nuke would look like for the rest of the world. It's not pretty.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/simulate-end-world-interactive-map-153424200.html

6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Simulate the End of the World With This Interactive Map of U.S. Nuclear Targets (Original Post) Xolodno May 2016 OP
The issue of war and peace needed to get more attention in this campaign. LongTomH May 2016 #1
Nuclear war is at least as devastating as global warming and faster acting leveymg May 2016 #2
They've been trying to "agree to never use them"... Xolodno May 2016 #6
I agree. Xolodno May 2016 #3
With Trump running scscholar May 2016 #4
Nor does it help that Putin is their version of Trump in many respects. Xolodno May 2016 #5

LongTomH

(8,636 posts)
1. The issue of war and peace needed to get more attention in this campaign.
Mon May 16, 2016, 05:43 PM
May 2016

Nuclear winter is still a danger we face, three decades after the close of Cold War 1.0.

leveymg

(36,418 posts)
2. Nuclear war is at least as devastating as global warming and faster acting
Mon May 16, 2016, 05:59 PM
May 2016

We and Russia have 90 percent of the world's nkukes and could reduce the potential damage the same amount by simply agreeing never to use them against each other.

Xolodno

(6,330 posts)
6. They've been trying to "agree to never use them"...
Mon May 16, 2016, 06:26 PM
May 2016

....since 1947, hows that track record going? Sure a few treaties were made, but we actually pulled out of one of them (two if you count one of the START treaties). But in order to agree to never use them, you have to eliminate them all. We came close to that deal in 1986 at the Reykjavík Summit when Gorbachev offered to eliminate all their nukes if the US did as well.

But....Ronold Reagan wouldn't go for it so he could develop his Strategic Defense Initiative a.k.a. "Star Wars"; which was in a way a forerunner to the anti-missile system we've been deploying in Eastern Europe (which I might add, is now a joke due to Russia developing hyper-sonic ballistic missiles to counter this very system, can't make this shit up).

Xolodno

(6,330 posts)
3. I agree.
Mon May 16, 2016, 06:04 PM
May 2016

It amazes me some here imply another arms race or even war with an enemy with nukes is acceptable.

Problem with nuke's, once those birds hit their target, the damage isn't just limited to there. The fallout afterwards can make a real mess of things for both allied nations and the country using them.

Xolodno

(6,330 posts)
5. Nor does it help that Putin is their version of Trump in many respects.
Mon May 16, 2016, 06:11 PM
May 2016

Only, Putin seems to know what he can get away with. Trump on the other hand, doesn't seem to have that sense.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Simulate the End of the W...