I feel embarrassed to be unaware of the subject, one that I have not even heard mentioned before. On the contrary, I would have understood much earlier that the risks of a nuclear war were far more serious than I imagined. I assumed that the planet would be able to withstand the explosion of hundreds of nuclear bombs calculating that, in both the United States and the USSR, countless tests have been carried out over the years. I had not taken into account a very simple reality: it is not the same thing to explode 500 nuclear bombs over 1,000 days as it is to do the same thing in one day...I'm not going to use this post to discuss the validity of the observations, but rather to reflect on the fact that these thoughts are expressed by a man who for the last 50 years has been a world leader. I never knew that he was now a blogger. This is his signature:
A nuclear conflict between the two weakest nuclear powers would be sufficient, such as India and Pakistan – who nevertheless possess far more than 100 weapons of this kind – and the human race would disappear...
"The only way to eliminate the possibility of a climatic disaster is to eliminate nuclear weapons."
His name is easier to read at the link. You'll be surprised...
As it has been expressed more eloquently elsewhere, a world without nuclear weapons is a more dangerous one. Every nuclear power will retain the capability to assemble functional nukes and delivery systems within hours, if not sooner.
ReplyDeleteAs soon as there is a credible threat, the powers assemble their nukes. They will consider preemptively striking at their enemies, who may need additional hours to assemble their nukes. Or so they think.
Thus every international crisis automatically becomes a nuclear crisis because they instantly become a race to acquire nukes before the other guy does. And, quite possibly, to use them.
A world without nuclear weapons -- especially second strike nuclear weapons -- becomes a panicky, dangerous world with twitchy fingers on nuclear triggers.
I thought that must be Mr. Castro. I understand he's just said he regrets the Cuban missile crisis. Not, apparently, so much because it would have been a bad idea to blow up the U.S., but because it turned out "not to have been worth it."
ReplyDeleteTexan, those comments are included in this Atlantic interview -
ReplyDeletehttp://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2010/09/fidel-to-ahmadinejad-stop-slandering-the-jews/62566/
You may want to change the filename of the signature, it says his name right there...
ReplyDeleteI left the name there because I wasn't trying to keep it secret as part of a game or anything. I just like to refer readers to primary sources when there is additional useful info there.
ReplyDelete