Chance Of Nuclear War 2022 - Will Russia Use Nuclear Weapons?
At a time when Moscow continues to suffer massive military setbacks and lose significant territory to Kyiv, President Joe Biden on Thursday warned the world could face "Armageddon" if Russian leader Vladimir Putin makes good on threats to use nuclear weapons in Ukraine, an unusually blunt statement and one of the most candid remarks on the risks of nuclear conflict from a U.S. leader since the Cold War. This can increase the chance of nuclear war 2022.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has ordered the activation of 300,000 reservists in response to the country's recent devastating defeats in northeastern Ukraine.
In the event of a threat to our country's territorial integrity and to defend Russia and our people, we will certainly make use of all weapon systems available to us.- Putin said
These forces are conventional, meaning they do not use nuclear weapons. As a warning, he stressed that his words were not a bluff. I would want to remind those who are trying to blackmail us with nuclear weapons that the wind may change direction. Putin's deployment of some of Russia's conventional troops, despite his menacing words, may reduce the likelihood that Russia will use nuclear weapons against Ukraine.
This, however, would simply prolong a cruel conflict and may encourage Putin to resort to non-nuclear types of escalation that are far more destructive than anything Russia has done thus far.
Historydemonstrates the folly of assuming that each new, more lethal weapon would not be used. Nuclear nations have 50,000 nuclear missiles that can reach their targets in minutes and destroy every major city on the globe. all in the hope that they would never be deployed.
This time it will be the same until we change our war mindset. We're headed toward nuclear war. Finance illustrates inevitability. It makes no sense to speak about an interest rate as high or low, such as 50% or 1%, without comparing it to a particular time period. A yearly interest rate of 50% is considered high.50% interest per century is low. When a 1% annual interest rate is compounded, it becomes 100%.
In the same manner, it does not make sense to speak about the chance of nuclear war being high or low—for example, 10 percent against 1 percent—without relating it to a particular period of time, for example, 10 percent per decade or 1 percent per year. After correcting the units, we may discuss if a nuclear war is likely each year. It wouldn't matter. If the chance increases by 10% each year, the Holocaust will occur in about ten years. It will take 100 years if the rate is 1% per year.
The decreased likelihood every year delays civilization's demise but does not alter its inevitability. Both scenarios guarantee nuclear war. This pair illustrates a crucial aspect. Our only hope is to lower the likelihood to zero. Our policies are like playing Russian roulette with more bullets.
This horrific game has been triggered more than expected. Our actions might start the last world battle. Pulling the trigger will eventually fire the gun. Each "minor" battle in Iran, Iraq, Vietnam, or Afghanistan, each threat of bloodshed like the Cuban missile crisis, and each day that a missile or computer fails all contribute to the trigger being pulled.
Stop playing Russian roulette. Moving beyond war is the only way to escape nuclear roulette. Swords into plowshares may have been impossible, while moral and desirable. Survival requires it now.
This might be the finest or worst period in human development, depending on our choices. Technologyhas globalized the Biblical injunction: "I have placed before you lifeand death, blessing and curse; so choose life, that you and your descendants may live." To keep from going extinct, we need to stop seeing violence as necessary for survival and start seeing war as the biggest threat.
What's the risk of nuclear war from the Russia-Ukraine conflict? - BBC News
Recent studies have shown that Australia and New Zealand are among the most likely regions on Earth to be habitable after a nuclear war.
While the Academy's analysis estimates a 3 to 10-year window for recovery, it cautions that long-term global effects cannot be ruled out. There would be repercussions outside the blast zones due to the lowered ozone concentrations.
Yet the bulk of people would perish in horrible ways from burns, radiation, and hunger, and society as we know it would likely come to an end. In a destroyed, desolate world, survivors would have to scrape by.
Russia's official nuclear policy has always stressed that the country would only use nuclear weapons first if the state's very survival was at stake, rather than if its "territorial integrity" were at risk. The use of nuclear weapons would have devastating effects and require a strong response, which could quickly turn into a wide-scale regional conflict and, in the end, a nuclear exchange on a global scale.