Skip to comments.
Who Is Going To Use Nuclear Weapons First?
Citizen Watch Report ^
| Michael
Posted on 05/08/2025 3:21:32 AM PDT by davikkm
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-58 last
To: Jim Noble
Bump.
And it ended a war.
41
posted on
05/08/2025 5:31:05 AM PDT
by
Texas Fossil
(Texas is not about where you were born, but a Free State of Heart, Mind and Attitude.)
To: davikkm
Old idea. The US used them in 1945.
42
posted on
05/08/2025 5:36:46 AM PDT
by
GingisK
To: davikkm
The US already did. And it was devastating. I hope they are never used again.
43
posted on
05/08/2025 5:37:43 AM PDT
by
silent majority rising
(When it is dark enough, men see the stars. Ralph Waldo Emerson)
To: davikkm
Such a bizarre fantasy piece - I’m willing to bet that several of the mentioned countries don’t even have a deployable effective weapon.
Completely different thing to have some successful(-ish) tests, and quite another into making an actual useful weapon.
Weird uninformed blogger fear porn.
44
posted on
05/08/2025 5:42:49 AM PDT
by
larrytown
(A Cadet will not lie, cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do. Then they graduate...)
To: davikkm
It's really pretty comical, watching fairly intelligent people insist that nuclear weapons will
never, ever be used - when they've already been used. Only the fear of nuclear retaliation has prevented further use of such weapons. And that fear will not always be present; for example, a country like Israel might feel compelled to use nukes to repel an invasion by a non-nuclear opponent. And with more and more countries obtaining nuclear weapons, "plausible deniability" enters the equation; if a nuclear weapon from some unknown source detonates in some port city somewhere, what will the response be? I doubt there will be many leaders eager to commit national suicide, by immediately ordering nuclear retaliation based on guess work. And finally, there is the hate factor - some folks are so filled with hate, that they might actually risk annihilation just to kill those [fill-in-the-blanks].
The most comical aspect might be - I think it's quite likely that people who think nobody, anywhere will ever use nukes, no matter what, are likely to be the cause of the next nuclear war. They will simply push a dangerous situation too far, being blissfully ignorant of Murphy's Law and the FAFO factor...
45
posted on
05/08/2025 5:50:22 AM PDT
by
Who is John Galt?
("...mit Pulver und Blei, Die Gedanken sind frei!")
To: davikkm
IRAN will be the first to use nuclear weapons. Israel will be the second.
To: L,TOWM
Think Hitler in the bunker paranoid crazy. Hitler WAS in the bunker going crazy and chose NOT to use chemical weapons of mass destruction the battlefield. Sorry, bad example.
47
posted on
05/08/2025 8:12:20 AM PDT
by
central_va
(I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn...)
To: central_va
No one. Nukes are bluff weapons. There is no country going to pull the nuclear weapon trigger first.
If a third party gets a nuke, or acts as a proxy for a nuke power (e.g. Red China, John Bolton) and blame and retaliatory parties are not obvious, then maybe one does go off. My guess would be that if the U.S. were the target (e.g. dirty bomb smuggled in) the response will be massive conventional, but not necessarily to the right target. If it is against someone with a limited conventional response (e.g. India/Pakistan), then the response may also be nuclear.
I am not an expert, just applying incomplete knowledge, common sense, and understanding of human nature.
48
posted on
05/08/2025 8:14:51 AM PDT
by
Dr. Sivana
("Whatsoever he shall say to you, do ye." (John 2:5))
To: dp0622
(Is it something you want?)
Nope.
But I expect it to happen.
There are passages yet future thao seem to illustrate such.
49
posted on
05/08/2025 9:58:30 AM PDT
by
SaveFerris
(Luke 17:28 ... as it was in the Days of Lot; They did Eat, They Drank, They Bought, They Sold ......)
To: DownInFlames
50
posted on
05/08/2025 10:00:13 AM PDT
by
SaveFerris
(Luke 17:28 ... as it was in the Days of Lot; They did Eat, They Drank, They Bought, They Sold ......)
To: central_va
No one. Nukes are bluff weapons. There is no country going to pull the nuclear weapon trigger first. No SANE country. But since Islamists are insane, they (Iran or Pakistan) are likely to do so.
51
posted on
05/08/2025 10:13:59 AM PDT
by
JimRed
(TERM LIMITS, NOW! Finish the damned WALL! TRUTH is the new HATE fSPEECH! )
To: Rural_Michigan
Why do people waste their time and effort writing crap like this. Someone pays them to do so. Follow the money!
52
posted on
05/08/2025 10:22:39 AM PDT
by
JimRed
(TERM LIMITS, NOW! Finish the damned WALL! TRUTH is the new HATE fSPEECH! )
To: central_va
No one. Nukes are bluff weapons. There is no country going to pull the nuclear weapon trigger first.If their leaders are rational. North Korea, Pakistan and Iran's leadership are not rational.
53
posted on
05/08/2025 10:29:09 AM PDT
by
cpdiii
(cane cutter, deckhand, oilfield roughneck, drilling fluid tech, geologist, pilot, pharmacist ,MAGA)
To: cpdiii
54
posted on
05/08/2025 10:32:22 AM PDT
by
SaveFerris
(Luke 17:28 ... as it was in the Days of Lot; They did Eat, They Drank, They Bought, They Sold ......)
To: SaveFerris
The argument that no one would ever be irrational and use nukes falls apart on a key point:
It assumes everyone controlling nukes (or may in the future) is rational (and will stay that way), or does not have a death (or glory in death) wish.
55
posted on
05/08/2025 4:27:33 PM PDT
by
Paul R.
(Old Viking saying: "Never be more than 3 steps away from your weapon ... or a Uriah Heep song!" ;-))
To: Paul R.
56
posted on
05/09/2025 7:37:07 PM PDT
by
SaveFerris
(Luke 17:28 ... as it was in the Days of Lot; They did Eat, They Drank, They Bought, They Sold ......)
To: Nateman
“20 Megatons because anything bigger simply wastes its energy going up into space.”
Not wasted. Larger bombs risk blowing parts of the atmosphere into outer space. That would be bad mmmkay?
57
posted on
05/09/2025 8:00:51 PM PDT
by
Justa
(Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people....)
To: cpdiii
A late reply (still had the window open!) :
The CURRENT leadership of those countries you mention is rational enough to not use nukes first, under most circumstances. Best guess IMO is that the Norks would stay on that path: There is no real history of North Korea’s leaders exhorting an end in mutual fire: They are just interested in blackmail and staying in power.
The Iranians don’t particularly want nukes so they can push the “end everything” button either, but, here I hedge a little because of the religious / hate factor. Do I think there are absolute nutcases in the mid-levels of the Iranian power structure who would gladly go out in a blaze of glory, just to be able to take Great Satan or Little Satan with them? Of course. Could they ever get their hands on “the button”? Probably not, but, that not a real confident “probably”, ya’ know.
In the case of the Paks, the problem comes if there is a radical populist Muslim overthrow of the present government. This is the opposite of Iran, where the general population are NOT nuts.
58
posted on
05/14/2025 5:14:45 AM PDT
by
Paul R.
(Old Viking saying: "Never be more than 3 steps away from your weapon ... or a Uriah Heep song!" ;-))
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-58 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson