Difference between revisions of "Nuclear war"
m (typo) |
(more focussed lede) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
|constitutes=war | |constitutes=war | ||
}} | }} | ||
| − | '''Nuclear war''' is a [[war]] in which | + | '''Nuclear war''' is a [[war]] in which [[nuclear weapons]] are used. Their destructive capacity is so extreme, their number so large that such a war could potentially the lives of not only the human species but perhaps a large proportion of other species on [[earth]]. |
| + | |||
| + | ==Strategic v. tactical== | ||
| + | Strategic and tactical nuclear weapons, tactical nukes not causing as much destruction. A war that would see the exchange of a smaller number of tactical weapons may not be considered a nuclear war in the classical sense. It is unclear whether this distinction would be meaningful in practice - or whether use of tactical weapons would lead to an escalation.<ref>https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/why-americas-b-61-12-nuclear-bomb-tempting-use-during-war-84921</ref><ref>https://fas.org/blogs/security/2015/11/b61-12_cartwright/</ref> | ||
==Subterranean Ballistic Missiles== | ==Subterranean Ballistic Missiles== | ||
| Line 10: | Line 13: | ||
===United States=== | ===United States=== | ||
| − | + | A now declassified project from the [[1960s]] aimed to build a network of mobile nuclear missile launch sites under the ice in [[Greenland]].<ref>https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1084951/ww3-fears-pentagon-mobile-nuclear-base-greenland-spt</ref> Another feasibility study from 1982 envision an underground system with 400 miles of tunnels: "Design and Construction of Deep Underground Basing Facilities for Strategic Missiles".<ref>https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Zz8rAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA2</ref> | |
===Iran=== | ===Iran=== | ||
Revision as of 15:02, 28 January 2020
 Nuclear war  (war)   | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Interest of | • Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists • Albert Wohlstetter • Tod Wolters |
Nuclear war is a war in which nuclear weapons are used. Their destructive capacity is so extreme, their number so large that such a war could potentially the lives of not only the human species but perhaps a large proportion of other species on earth.
Contents
Strategic v. tactical
Strategic and tactical nuclear weapons, tactical nukes not causing as much destruction. A war that would see the exchange of a smaller number of tactical weapons may not be considered a nuclear war in the classical sense. It is unclear whether this distinction would be meaningful in practice - or whether use of tactical weapons would lead to an escalation.[1][2]
Subterranean Ballistic Missiles
While the launching of nuclear missiles via silo, U-Boat or ground based mobile launchers is relatively well known, there is a concept of fighting nuclear war from tunnel systems which would hold mobile nuclear missiles and in case of a war, "drill out of the ground" via tunnel boring machine (TBM).[3][4] Prolonged nuclear war, one that carries on for months or years in exchanging missiles, would be possible.
United States
A now declassified project from the 1960s aimed to build a network of mobile nuclear missile launch sites under the ice in Greenland.[5] Another feasibility study from 1982 envision an underground system with 400 miles of tunnels: "Design and Construction of Deep Underground Basing Facilities for Strategic Missiles".[6]
Iran
In 2015 Iranian state television has broadcasted footage of underground tunnels with mobile launchers.[7][8]
China
China does have a large underground network.[9][10] There is increased focus from the US side at least from the Nuclear Posture Review of 2002 on, to develop: "improved earth penetrating weapons (EPWs) to counter the increased use by potential adversaries of hardened deeply buried facilities".[11] The NDAA of 2013 asks the United States Strategic Command to submit a report: "on the underground tunnel network used by the People’s Republic of China with respect to the capability of the United States to use conventional and nuclear forces to neutralize such tunnels and what is stored within such tunnels".[12]
Related Quotations
| Page | Quote | Author | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cold War II | “The United States remains the world’s leading power with global interests, and it cannot afford to choose between Europe and the Indo-Pacific. Instead, Washington and its allies should develop a defense strategy capable of deterring and, if necessary, defeating Russia and China at the same time.” | Atlantic Council Matthew Kroenig | 18 February 2022 |
| Ben Hodges | “The Russians have zero, zero positive outcomes if they use a nuclear weapon. There's no benefit for them if they use it...The Army, the Air Force, all of our services are constantly training, preparing, maintaining a level of readiness to send the signal to the Kremlin that we are ready, that we are prepared....The apocalyptic sort of ending is not going to happen because even the Russians know that there's no positive outcome for them if they do that...The only benefit they get is from threatening to use it because they see that we are so concerned that they might do it; that we stop from doing things that Ukraine needs such as providing long-range weapons...After the British and the French provided long-range precision weapons to Ukraine, Russia did nothing. There was nothing they could do. And that's why I think it's just very unlikely.” | Ben Hodges | 21 August 2023 |
Related Documents
| Title | Type | Publication date | Author(s) | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Document:Capitalism normalizes death: From COVID-19 to the threat of nuclear war | Article | Andre Damon | The total devaluation of human life, the indifference to mass death in the pandemic and the recklessness with which American capitalism is rushing into conflict with Russia, reflect the views and social character of the American ruling class. This parasitic oligarchy feasts upon the impoverishment and exploitation of the working population. | |
| Document:National Missile Defense-Jochen Scholz | interview | 30 January 2011 | Jochen Scholz | Excerpted from a NuoViso interview with Lieutenant-Colonel Jochen Scholz on the American missile defense in Europe and the real reason why it is placed there. |
| Document:Why US missile defense is not a defensive but an offensive weapons system | article | 10 March 2019 | Thomas Röper |
References
- ↑ https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/why-americas-b-61-12-nuclear-bomb-tempting-use-during-war-84921
- ↑ https://fas.org/blogs/security/2015/11/b61-12_cartwright/
- ↑ https://archive.org/details/DTIC_ADA091976/page/n115
- ↑ https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a092013.pdf
- ↑ https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1084951/ww3-fears-pentagon-mobile-nuclear-base-greenland-spt
- ↑ https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Zz8rAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA2
- ↑ https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3272611/Iran-broadcasts-footage-underground-missile-base.html
- ↑ https://youtu.be/WpIN1fdW-bw
- ↑ https://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/china/underground-great-wall.htm
- ↑ https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/chinas-underground-great-wall-subterranean-ballistic-missiles
- ↑ https://fas.org/wp-content/uploads/media/Excerpts-of-Classified-Nuclear-Posture-Review.pdf
- ↑ https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/hr4310/text
