0
Would a world in which most of the states rather than just a few had nuclear weapon and long range ballistic missiles be more peaceful or more war prone?
Wiki User
∙ 12y agoWant this question answered?
Be notified when an answer is posted
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What is the difference between deterrence by denial and deterrence by punishment?
Fred Korkisch This is a rather artificial question, because in the official literature the term "deterrence by denial" was never used, asked, nor answered, nor mentioned. The post-nuclear literature tried to invent and imagined a number of terms and phrases that were never used by the people who wrote about nuclear war planning and doctrine. Deterrence was either used in relation to * Gradual Deterrence (see: The gradual use of nuclear weapons, or a gradual use of force, like the escalation President Johnson used against North Vietnam etc.); * Minimum Deterrence (see: The threat to use force, including nuclear weapons on a limited scale, or the minimum number of strategic weapons which provides a credible deterrence; see SALT, START); * Finite Deterrence (see: The nuclear capabilties which will survive any enemy attack, available for a devastating counterstrike, like SLBM-weapons on submarines; * Deterrence by Punishment (this is a rather juridical term, used after WW II, to explain the legal rightfulness of the bombardments of German and Japanese cities, as a justified "punishment" for the aggressions of both states, used later on for the possible use of nuclear weapons as a retaliatorial strike. To explain "Deterrence by Denial" one can follow the logic of protection of nuclear delivery systems by various measures, like dispersal of bombers, missiles in silos, SLBM-submarines etc.
Who thought of the idea to make a nuclear bomb?
H. G. Wells in his 1914 novel "The World Set Free" was the first to publish on the use of nuclear bombs in a war, he was the first to use the term atomic bomb to refer to bombs that obtain their energy from inside the atom (rather then from chemical reactions between atoms/molecules).Note: H. G. Wells atomic bombs were not based on using nuclear fission or nuclear fusion (as the real bombs are), as the nucleus of the atom had not yet been discovered and neither nuclear fission nor nuclear fusion had been discovered. As the only method of releasing the energy of the atom known at the time was radioactive decay, H. G. Wells based his atomic bombs (and atomic engines) on a hypothetical method of "accelerated radioactive decay".
When was Nuclear warfare created?
Presumably it came part and parcel with the invention of the atomic bomb. Two atomic bombs, dropped on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, caused Japan to surrender to the United States in World War II, and ended the war in the Pacific. To date, these remain the only times a nuclear bomb has been detonated in an attack against another country, rather than as a test.
What were the cons of dropping the atomic bomb on hiroshima?
Pro: To save millions of Japanese lives, millions of Allied lives including the Reds who were ready to invade Japan. That is what the atomic bombs did accomplish. Some Japanese say it was better to lose some of their own rather than be wiped off the face of the earth by the Reds, Americans, Canadians and Australians.Con: They killed hundreds of thousands of people with the bombing, radiation fallout and subsequent infections and cancerous diseases derived from the radiation poisoning. Atomic bombs are not militarily proper to use.Thoughts to consider: The military leaders for the next 6 decades have never lobbed one of their nuclear missiles knowing they would wipe out 1/3 of the earth with one of the modern nuclear missiles. That would not include the amount of deaths afterward. So did they learn from the atomic bombing of World War 2?The military warriors of the Red Army, US Army, The Marines, The Royal Forces all say they are extremely grateful for the atomic bombs finally motivating Emperor Hirohito to surrender. Had Hirohito not surrendered it is likely a good eighty percent of the Russians, Americans, Brits, Canadians and Australians would have died right alongside the Japanese military and civilians. Many of the warriors have gone up to the developers of the atomic bombs and thanked them. There have been Japanese civilians who were so relieved it was over and mourned the loss of the Japanese who had to die just to get Hirohito to finally end the war. The Japanese civilians did not have any "power of the voice" to motivate their leaders to stop the war.
How did the US react to the Cuba missiles?
Intelligence information gathered by both the US intelligence services and by the USAF using high-altitude U2 spy 'planes, identified that the Soviet Union was in the process of buolding launch bases for surface-to-air missiles in Cuba that would have easily enabled it to target all areas of the USA and Canada. President John F.Kennedy called a summit meeting with Soviet Premier Nikita Kruschev to debate the issue, in which Kennedy offered to withdraw America's ageing fleet of Atlas ICBM's from Turkey in exchange for the USSR abandoning it's missile prgramme in Cuba, but Kruschev refused and the meeting ended without agreement. Kennedy was a young President who was surrounded by a lot of hardline, and indeed somewhat unhinged, Generals who wanted to use the situation as an excuse for launching a pre-emptive nuclear strike against the USSR. However the Presidential advisory team, which included Secretary of State Dean Rusk and Defence Secretary Robert MacNamara, counselled a more defensive position and recommended that the US Navy mount a naval blockade of Cuba, with an ultimatum to Kruschev that any Soviet military vessels that attempted to run the blockade would be regarded as acting belligerently, and be attacked and sunk. The tensest moments of the crisis occurred between 22nd -24th October 1962, when a Soviet fleet set off from Russian waters carrying what were known to be nuclear missiles or components of them. It was known that these Soviet merchant vessels were escorted by Russian battleships, and that any attempt by the USSR to run the blockade would result in a major naval engagement between the Superpowers that would inevitably escalate into WW3. The USAF was placed on a DEFCOM II state of alert, with intercontinental nuclear-laden B-52G bombers ready to take off and launch pre-emptive strikes against the Soviet Union- the highest state of nuclear alert that the US has been in so far. US military reserves were called up, and the nation's infrastrucuture readied itself for nuclear war. Panic buying of non-perishable foodstuffs, fuel and survivial equipment occurred in towns and cities across the US- in a few cases the National Guard had to be called out to prevent looting, and a few people were indeed shot dead whilst trying to burgle shops and stores. Others committed suicide rather than perish horribly in the awful lingering death a nuclear apocalypse would bring. In the UK, Britain's fleet of nuclear-armed Vulcan intercontinental bombers were placed on alert, and Kennedy was constantly on the 'phone to British Prime Minister Harold MacMillan for advice and guidance as to what to do. In some cases he was in tears, saying that he didn't know for how much longer he could control the US Chiefs of Staff and relying heavily upon MacMillan for help in the situation as an elder statesman. Jackie Kennedy and her children were offered sanctuary in a nuclear bunker but she declined, saying that the Kennedy family would stick together no matter what. It took two days for the Soviet fleet to get within range of Cuba- non-suspicious Eastern Bloc vessels, such as simple cargo vessels or fuel tankers, were allowed through, but definitely nothing military. In the end, with just 3 and a half hours to go before the missile-carrying Soviet fleet hove into view of the American blockade, Kruschev ordered the ships to turn round and head for home. The crisis was aborted- but not completely over. On 27th October, an American U2 spy 'plane was shot down by a Russian anti-aircraft battery over Havana with the death of it's two crewmen. The war-mad generals in the Pentagon reacted to this with fury and nearly acted on their own initiative in ordering a counter-attack against the Russians, but Kennedy strictly forbade it, saying that it was not worth plunging the world into the abyss over the loss of one 'plane. He was by now afraid that his own civil administration could be in jeopardy, worrying that there could be a US military coup against his Government that would place him under house arrest, suspend civilian Government and place the nation under military rule in order to go to war with the USSR. Thankfully, this did not take place. It later became apparent that the Soviet missiles aboard the Russian ships were not equipped with nuclear warheads, and also that the US Atlas missiles in Turkey were so old as to make them virtually obsolete as a genuine threat. History has to judge who (if anyone at all) was the victor in the situation- some say that it was Kennedy for standing up to his bellicose military and for adopting a defensive rather than an offensive position, others say that it was Kruschev, who never had any intention of starting a war in the first place and was merely testing Kennedy's nerve because he was such a young President. Still more give all credit to Harold MacMillan for the sanguine advice and guidance he gave to the White House. But one thing is certain- we are all very lucky to be alive today, for few of us would be now if the situation had resulted in war.
Was the caddos Indians war like or peaceful?
Rather peaceful
What other nations have nuclear submarines?
US, USSR, Red China, Great Britain, and France have bona-fide atomic subs, taht is submarines powered by Nuclear reactors. all of these powers also have atomic and in some cases conventional, ( Russia has some) submarines which are equipped with long range nuclear missiles- such as Polaris, Poseidon, Trident, which are properly Missile types rather than submarine types.
What do nuclear warheads and artillery missiles have in common?
Both are weapons that are traditionally bombardment weapons, rather than precision weapons. Both are used from a distance rather than at short range. Although they may be aimed at a target, both have high explosive yields and typically cause collateral damage (much more so for nuclear weapons). One weapon that fell into both categories was the MGM-52 Lance nuclear-capable missile (1972-1992). Another is the Russian OTR-21 tactical missile.
Can you give a sentence with the word peaceable?
looking at the photograph the view look rather peaceful
What is the french word for peaceful living?
La vie pacifique. You can use paisible if you like but that means more like the gentle life rather than a peaceful one.
What is the principle of ballistic galvanometer?
when current passes through a coil of b.g then it rotates in a magnetic field and measures the quantity of charge rather than current
How is nuclear energy and fusion energy different?
Nuclear energy as we use it now is from nuclear fission. Nuclear fusion is the joining up of nuclei rather than the splitting (fission), but it is not yet available on Earth.
What is it like in a small town?
Rather calm and peaceful. You can do whatever you want all the time. Down side is that its rather boring at times very little entertainment.
What were other option rather an atomic bomb?
Atomic bombs are a type of Nuclear bomb and there are 2 types of nuclear bombs. The second type of nuclear bomb is a hydrogen bomb.
Do elephants have to be scared?
No elephants do not have to be scared. These animals are rather peaceful but are known to startle and scare easily and become aggressive.
Are fireworks nuclear fission?
No. Fireworks rely on chemical rather than nuclear energy. They are driven by an oxidation-reduction reaction. Fireworks were developed centuries before we discovered nuclear fission.
What would stars be like if hydrogen rather than iron had the lowest mass per nuclear particle?
nuclear fusion would not occur
