I think it's not only possible, but that the US government has been infiltrated by people who want it to happen and are doing their best to push Russia into a nuclear war.
What is the US doing exactly?
Ask HN: Do you think nuclear armageddon is plausible?
41–50 of 140 posts
Re: Ask HN: Do you think nuclear armageddon is plausible?
#42Paranoid, isolated man with a big red button in front of him that can take out every major city in the world.. It can absolutely happen. The subs are armed and ready. Literally the push of a button. The fact it hasn’t happened yet is something to be thankful for everyday.
It's much more involved than "literally the push of a button."
[deleted]
Re: Ask HN: Do you think nuclear armageddon is plausible?
#43Paranoid, isolated man with a big red button in front of him that can take out every major city in the world.. It can absolutely happen. The subs are armed and ready. Literally the push of a button. The fact it hasn’t happened yet is something to be thankful for everyday.
> Paranoid, isolated man with a big red button in front of him that can take out every major city in the world.
Wait though which guy are you talking about
Re: Ask HN: Do you think nuclear armageddon is plausible?
#44Nuclear armageddon almost happened multiple times in the past. To think it can’t happen is a necessary step in ensuring that it does.
And those are the ones that we know about.
Re: Ask HN: Do you think nuclear armageddon is plausible?
#45All it takes is a little confusion, and a couple of times only a single individual stood in the way of a nuclear exchange. Plenty of close calls: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nuclear_close_calls - even one after the Cold War ended.
And those are just the ones we know of. It's likely we'll never hear about the even closer calls, or the ones with embarrassing causes.
Re: Ask HN: Do you think nuclear armageddon is plausible?
#46Paranoid, isolated man with a big red button in front of him that can take out every major city in the world.. It can absolutely happen. The subs are armed and ready. Literally the push of a button. The fact it hasn’t happened yet is something to be thankful for everyday.
While I agree with the other poster that it's a little more involved(though for a few decades the nuclear code in america was 000000 so....)
the thing i've heard said is that at any given moment in time now we are potentially 30 minutes away from the end of civilization as we know it.
Re: Ask HN: Do you think nuclear armageddon is plausible?
#47Paranoid, isolated man with a big red button in front of him that can take out every major city in the world.. It can absolutely happen. The subs are armed and ready. Literally the push of a button. The fact it hasn’t happened yet is something to be thankful for everyday.
> Paranoid, isolated man with a big red button in front of him that can take out every major city in the world. Wait though which guy are you talking about
Yes
Re: Ask HN: Do you think nuclear armageddon is plausible?
#48I think it's more plausible that Russia would use mini-nukes on certain strategic targets. It would be to signal that they're willing to go all the way, but without actually committing suicide by nuking western countries. The nuclear super-powers are in a situation where they have enough nukes to obliterate each other - many, many times over. But obviously no-one wants to take that chance - even with all the modern a…
There's so much uninformed conversation around, do people in this thread not realize that it Russia nukes any Ukrainian site, the US is obliged to nuke Russia a la Budapest Memorandum ?
According to the Budapest Memorandum, the US is also required to be attacking Russia right now. Obviously we're not, so I wouldn't assume we're automatically going to annihilate Russia if they use a tactical nuke in Ukraine.
Re: Ask HN: Do you think nuclear armageddon is plausible?
#49I think it's more plausible that Russia would use mini-nukes on certain strategic targets. It would be to signal that they're willing to go all the way, but without actually committing suicide by nuking western countries. The nuclear super-powers are in a situation where they have enough nukes to obliterate each other - many, many times over. But obviously no-one wants to take that chance - even with all the modern a…
There's so much uninformed conversation around, do people in this thread not realize that it Russia nukes any Ukrainian site, the US is obliged to nuke Russia a la Budapest Memorandum ?
Budapest Memorandum clearly has no weight as Ukraine's borders haven't been respected by Russia for years; even if one considers the Donbas involvement legitimate, the present invasion still represents a violation of said borders. They have been pressured militarily and economically, both also violations of the agreement.
Re: Ask HN: Do you think nuclear armageddon is plausible?
#50I think it's more plausible that Russia would use mini-nukes on certain strategic targets. It would be to signal that they're willing to go all the way, but without actually committing suicide by nuking western countries. The nuclear super-powers are in a situation where they have enough nukes to obliterate each other - many, many times over. But obviously no-one wants to take that chance - even with all the modern a…
There's so much uninformed conversation around, do people in this thread not realize that it Russia nukes any Ukrainian site, the US is obliged to nuke Russia a la Budapest Memorandum ?
Budapest Memorandum is null and void.
Nothing happened when Russia invaded in 2014., and nothing happened now.