Iranian officials urged young people to form human chains to protect power plants, as U.S. President Donald Trump warned that a “whole civilization will die tonight” if Tehran does not meet his latest deadline.
No, the rest of the world isn’t just going to instantly nuke the US. If Iran gets nuked it won’t be via an ICBM but more likely a traditional aircraft or possibly ship launched nuke. Until it goes off it won’t look too much different from any of the other weapons being dropped on Iran. What it would do though is instantly turn the US into even more of a pariah than it already is. You’d likely see pretty much instant sanctions across the board which would tank the US economy, and might finally manage to get Trump impeached and convicted. Might even be able to convince the spineless bastards in Washington to hand Trump over to the ICC in exchange for lifting some of the sanctions.
How can they sanction us when global finance still overwhelmingly depends on the dollar though? It would certainly accelerate efforts to move to a new financial regime but it would still take years to accomplish.
Maybe mass dumping of US treasuries could be a feasible immediate option.
How can they sanction us when global finance still overwhelmingly depends on the dollar though?
The world has been gradually de-dollarizing for over a decade now. USD held as global currency reserves has fallen from 70% to 40%. BRICS nations are implementing their own payment systems based on the renminbi, and the eurozone obviously can operate independently already.
A lot of global value is tied up in US investment systems, sure. But a nuke drop would make that value not very valuable anymore. It would suck and the world would be stuck in another great depression, but the rest of the world has plenty of functional financial systems to keep moving on.
Theres every reason to think the Russians would consider a nuclear trigger-happy US an existential threat to them and launch a pre emptive attack. After all, the US (through Ukraine) launched attacks on Russia’s strategic bombers and Putins nuclear bunker which would have been considered suicidal during the Cold War
Yes Russia could launch a preemptive nuclear attack because Trump is a lunatic who kills and kidnaps leaders of other countries and sends drones (via Ukraine) to bomb Russian strategic sites
So Russia might think “kill them before they kill us” should Trump or Netanyahu use nukes against Iran.
MAD doesn’t work if one of the players is literally mad.
In response, the US nukes Russia. Not just a little bit either, they nuke all population sites.
No “decapitation” strike is possible from either side. Any attack by either side is met by the other striking back, and again not just a little bit - all population sites. That is what mutually assured destruction is.
And maybe more if you need:
if you think the US nukes Russia, then:
surprise, Russia nukes the US back.
Once again, no decapitation strike is possible from either side. A strike by the US is met by Russia striking back. That is what mutually assured destruction is.
MAD literally works if either side starts nuking the other, regardless of the reason why. This is the whole basis of MAD.
Ok I’m really gonna peace out. You really need to do some reading.
I’ve read Schelling’s Strategy of Conflict so I have done some reading on this. Once again you are assuming players are always rational which is a simplistic assumption. The game doesn’t work if one side doesn’t care about iterative rounds, chooses to signal erratic behaviour or doesn’t understand the implications of their actions.
A good example is Nixon’s “madman theory” during the Vietnam conflict.
Trump is erratic and can’t be assumed to act rationally , so his use of a nuclear weapon would massively increase the chance that Russia would use one in response on the basis that the US is willing to kill the leaders of other countries in a sneak attack.
MAD is not set in stone and can break down in certain circumstances.
Not immediately with Iran, but even if it would be a singular nuclear strike without any reaction, it would cross maybe the only real red line that still exists in international relation; Russia might then use nukes in Ukraine, or China in Taiwan, even if only for the EMP or to sink a fleet of ships at once. It will cause a dam to break regarding the use of tactical nuclear weapons.
I’m with you on Russia but I don’t think the PLA would consider nuking Taiwan. They ideologically consider everyone on the island to be Chinese and they also certainly don’t want to blow it to ashes just to have to rebuild it from scratch.
IMO the wind is blowing toward a political reunification where China takes it without a shot. The opposition party is already pushing that and the US is not a stable or reliable enough ally at this point for them credibly rely on if China actually invades.
Not on the island but if the US now starts using tactical nukes in Iran, the nuclear power China would seriously consider its own tactical nuclear use cases - after all what’s the value in being a nuclear power if it’s a forgone conclusion that you won’t use them. Doubly so should the US prove it’s willingness to use tactical nukes now, as China would then need to expect that nukes might be used against them too, should it come to a military exchange with the US over Taiwan. It’s mutually assured destruction, but instead of destroying cities with ICBMs you sink each other’s aircraft carriers with smaller nukes.
Regarding Taiwan itself, I think there would be valid use cases, especially for the massive EMPs given off by nukes detonated in the atmosphere. They can disable an army of drones and most civilian communication systems all at once, which seems like a very solid first strike move if you don’t want to destroy the country but cause enough disruption to allow an invasion force to land.
I’m not a military strategist though, so no guarantees on any of this.
As I said, I completely agree regarding the island itself. I see that even the atmospheric use might be unrealistic there.
But if the US establishes that the use of tactical nukes is acceptable, I doubt they’d have the same qualms when it comes to ships or drones of the US Navy.
I don’t think Iran has nukes, and every other country will probably be very careful about dropping a nuke in the US. Maybe some rogue country would drop one to israel but I’m not sure this would happen becaues of MAD.
I think Russia would sell any ally to Satan for a single piece of bubble gum, if it felt like blowing bubbles. But they wouldn’t let the crisis go to waste either, that’s for damn sure.
Iran can however launch everything they have at the gulf states and israel, destroying all of their desalination plants and oil production and basically wiping them off the map and turbofucking the global economy into something worse than the great depression. They’ve been holding back so far, but if they get nuked they may as well just pull the trigger.
China has pretty clearly shown they are staying out of it. I also doubt Russia would fire at America over Iran. Although I’d wager they would nuke Ukraine given that the US just normalized it.
If a nuke is dropped it’s over for the world. Mutually assured destruction guarantees this.
No, the rest of the world isn’t just going to instantly nuke the US. If Iran gets nuked it won’t be via an ICBM but more likely a traditional aircraft or possibly ship launched nuke. Until it goes off it won’t look too much different from any of the other weapons being dropped on Iran. What it would do though is instantly turn the US into even more of a pariah than it already is. You’d likely see pretty much instant sanctions across the board which would tank the US economy, and might finally manage to get Trump impeached and convicted. Might even be able to convince the spineless bastards in Washington to hand Trump over to the ICC in exchange for lifting some of the sanctions.
One can dream.
How can they sanction us when global finance still overwhelmingly depends on the dollar though? It would certainly accelerate efforts to move to a new financial regime but it would still take years to accomplish.
Maybe mass dumping of US treasuries could be a feasible immediate option.
The world has been gradually de-dollarizing for over a decade now. USD held as global currency reserves has fallen from 70% to 40%. BRICS nations are implementing their own payment systems based on the renminbi, and the eurozone obviously can operate independently already.
A lot of global value is tied up in US investment systems, sure. But a nuke drop would make that value not very valuable anymore. It would suck and the world would be stuck in another great depression, but the rest of the world has plenty of functional financial systems to keep moving on.
The move to a new financial regime would take as long as it takes a market to crash.
Theres every reason to think the Russians would consider a nuclear trigger-happy US an existential threat to them and launch a pre emptive attack. After all, the US (through Ukraine) launched attacks on Russia’s strategic bombers and Putins nuclear bunker which would have been considered suicidal during the Cold War
If a nuclear weapon is used all bets are off.
Preemptive attacks don’t work when they will nuke you back. This is the principle behind Mutually Assured Destruction.
MAD assumes the other side is rational. Trump is a lunatic.
First you said Russia, not the US, would do a preemptive nuclear attack. So this isn’t about Trump, it’s about Putin.
Second, Russia wouldn’t do it because of MAD. That’s the whole concept of MAD.
You’re making no sense, so I think I’m gonna peace out.
Yes Russia could launch a preemptive nuclear attack because Trump is a lunatic who kills and kidnaps leaders of other countries and sends drones (via Ukraine) to bomb Russian strategic sites
So Russia might think “kill them before they kill us” should Trump or Netanyahu use nukes against Iran.
MAD doesn’t work if one of the players is literally mad.
Got it now?
Play this out:
Russia nukes the US.
In response, the US nukes Russia. Not just a little bit either, they nuke all population sites.
No “decapitation” strike is possible from either side. Any attack by either side is met by the other striking back, and again not just a little bit - all population sites. That is what mutually assured destruction is.
And maybe more if you need:
if you think the US nukes Russia, then:
surprise, Russia nukes the US back.
Once again, no decapitation strike is possible from either side. A strike by the US is met by Russia striking back. That is what mutually assured destruction is.
MAD literally works if either side starts nuking the other, regardless of the reason why. This is the whole basis of MAD.
Ok I’m really gonna peace out. You really need to do some reading.
I’ve read Schelling’s Strategy of Conflict so I have done some reading on this. Once again you are assuming players are always rational which is a simplistic assumption. The game doesn’t work if one side doesn’t care about iterative rounds, chooses to signal erratic behaviour or doesn’t understand the implications of their actions.
A good example is Nixon’s “madman theory” during the Vietnam conflict.
Trump is erratic and can’t be assumed to act rationally , so his use of a nuclear weapon would massively increase the chance that Russia would use one in response on the basis that the US is willing to kill the leaders of other countries in a sneak attack.
MAD is not set in stone and can break down in certain circumstances.
Not immediately with Iran, but even if it would be a singular nuclear strike without any reaction, it would cross maybe the only real red line that still exists in international relation; Russia might then use nukes in Ukraine, or China in Taiwan, even if only for the EMP or to sink a fleet of ships at once. It will cause a dam to break regarding the use of tactical nuclear weapons.
I’m with you on Russia but I don’t think the PLA would consider nuking Taiwan. They ideologically consider everyone on the island to be Chinese and they also certainly don’t want to blow it to ashes just to have to rebuild it from scratch.
IMO the wind is blowing toward a political reunification where China takes it without a shot. The opposition party is already pushing that and the US is not a stable or reliable enough ally at this point for them credibly rely on if China actually invades.
Not on the island but if the US now starts using tactical nukes in Iran, the nuclear power China would seriously consider its own tactical nuclear use cases - after all what’s the value in being a nuclear power if it’s a forgone conclusion that you won’t use them. Doubly so should the US prove it’s willingness to use tactical nukes now, as China would then need to expect that nukes might be used against them too, should it come to a military exchange with the US over Taiwan. It’s mutually assured destruction, but instead of destroying cities with ICBMs you sink each other’s aircraft carriers with smaller nukes.
Regarding Taiwan itself, I think there would be valid use cases, especially for the massive EMPs given off by nukes detonated in the atmosphere. They can disable an army of drones and most civilian communication systems all at once, which seems like a very solid first strike move if you don’t want to destroy the country but cause enough disruption to allow an invasion force to land.
I’m not a military strategist though, so no guarantees on any of this.
They consider Taiwan part of China. They would see nuking Taiwan as nuking their own left hand. Very unlikely.
As I said, I completely agree regarding the island itself. I see that even the atmospheric use might be unrealistic there.
But if the US establishes that the use of tactical nukes is acceptable, I doubt they’d have the same qualms when it comes to ships or drones of the US Navy.
I don’t think Iran has nukes, and every other country will probably be very careful about dropping a nuke in the US. Maybe some rogue country would drop one to israel but I’m not sure this would happen becaues of MAD.
Russia is allied with Iran.
That doesn’t mean they are under their nuclear umbrella. Russia will not sacrifice itself for Iran
I think Russia would sell any ally to Satan for a single piece of bubble gum, if it felt like blowing bubbles. But they wouldn’t let the crisis go to waste either, that’s for damn sure.
But while Putin is evil, he’s not Trump-levels of dumb, so he understands the risk of going nuclear against someone Trump-levels of dumb.
Yeah, but he’s old too. Might want to do it before he dies.
They would not risk an escalation over Iran that would hurt the Russian heartland.
You misunderstand MAD. That applies between nuclear states. No one will be rushing to launch retaliatory nukes on Iran’s behalf.
Still fucked, and who knows maybe they have something capable of hitting Israel
Who would fire back? Iran doesn’t have nukes.
Iran can however launch everything they have at the gulf states and israel, destroying all of their desalination plants and oil production and basically wiping them off the map and turbofucking the global economy into something worse than the great depression. They’ve been holding back so far, but if they get nuked they may as well just pull the trigger.
Hadn’t considered that. Doubt Trump has either.
Now look up how much of the world’s fertilizer comes from the middle east.
I don’t know, maybe Russia, China and if there is mass global destabilization India, Pakistan, and North Korea could get trigger happy.
China has pretty clearly shown they are staying out of it. I also doubt Russia would fire at America over Iran. Although I’d wager they would nuke Ukraine given that the US just normalized it.
MAD is when the other country can nuke you back. That doesn’t exist here. (As far as everyone knows.)
Someone does not know what he is talking about. This is not the 60’s.