Tip of the Hat


 
HomeHome  GalleryGallery  FAQFAQ  SearchSearch  RegisterRegister  Log inLog in  

Share | 
 

 huh?

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
LOR
Ninja Viking Lord of the Pit of Despair and Stuff
Ninja Viking Lord of the Pit of Despair and Stuff
avatar

Number of posts : 7797
Hedonistic Glory : 11108
Reputation : 77
Joined In : 2010-05-01
Age : 25
Location : PA

PostSubject: huh?   Fri May 31, 2013 2:23 pm

http://breakingdefense.com/2013/05/30/no-longer-unthinkable-should-us-ready-for-limited-nuclear-war/?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmaing5%7Cdl8%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D320818

im not sure i get how this works. The cold war existed because everyone was thinking someone would bomb someone suddenly if any sort of disturbance happened. How is this any different? Eventually one would think that a war like this would escalate to a point where the BIG bombs WOULD be used anyway, or the countries that have them would just use them from the get go. Maybe I'm assuming we haven't learned anything though.

still...its fucking stupid. why is this shit even still happening? a "limited nuclear war" is practically an oxymoron in my view


_________________
my bands- Lör
Top Hats and Effigies
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://myspace.com/halloflor
Gwonam
Mr. Game and Watch
Mr. Game and Watch
avatar

Number of posts : 650
Hedonistic Glory : 2330
Reputation : 27
Joined In : 2013-04-26
Age : 29

PostSubject: Re: huh?   Sun Jun 02, 2013 1:43 am

Limited nuclear war sounds like a miniaturizing of the issue. All people seem to care about is spin.

To the author's credit, the points they made about America becoming a diminishing power thanks to its expired attachment to nuclear deterrence is an undeniable fact. They have a hard time cleaning up after ourselves from the Cold War to this day, much less the way the US tried disposing of our weapons in the past. With countries like North Korea and Iran pooling resources, scientists and raw material to make bombs more effectively than the States could years ago in the heyday of the Cold War, the portrait of America being Interpol is being distorted by the faceless nation-state factions cropping up.

We know today that the US operates on an innumerable amount of proxy companies when dealing with objectives outside of the scope of the military. How much longer until bureaus like the CIA and NSA go the way of the dinosaurs, or until other countries get the hint and start passing their programs off to companies that are governed by profit or motive contrary to the usual UN policies? They likely already have a similar system in place for this very reason.

Limited nuclear war is, indeed, an oxymoron: you can shrink the bomb, the epicenter, the radiation, but a nuclear weapon being used has the potential to create a domino effect, rendering the concept of nuclear deterrence meaningless when countries like China have the personnel, the technology and know-how - not to mention the balls - to deliver any attack tri-fold.

Everything the Cold War was about can be unraveled with the miniaturization of nuclear weapons. Countries may begin to see them as legitimate electromagnetic pulse weapons to, in the event of an attack, shut down commerce and begin a war of attrition with little worry of fallout, radiation and other maladies that demonize the use of nukes.

This sort of thing still happens because nuclear weapons still exist. If they didn't exist, we would have a Cold War with biological weapons, and if we didn't have those, it would be something else. This is the fault of the delusion of conquest that still permeates many factions and countries of the world. The balance is being struck between how many guns you bring to the fight, how many guns you're prepared to use and how many guns they'll have to shoot before you use your guns. The problem with deterrence theory is that it assumes that the applier of said theory will never fire the first gun, leaving them as a very vulnerable target and open to the threshold of those various conquests. Decision making for deterrence theory isn't anywhere close to foolproof.

_________________
Squadala, we're off!
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_AWHOUHKN8
LOR
Ninja Viking Lord of the Pit of Despair and Stuff
Ninja Viking Lord of the Pit of Despair and Stuff
avatar

Number of posts : 7797
Hedonistic Glory : 11108
Reputation : 77
Joined In : 2010-05-01
Age : 25
Location : PA

PostSubject: Re: huh?   Sun Jun 02, 2013 12:56 pm

good point about the deterrence effect being lessened with the size of the bomb (at least thats what i thought you said- just woke up and decided to read that whole thing haha). it could potentially end up being more dangerous with smaller nukes becuase countries might feel less restraint in using "smaller" weapons, and the domino-effect like you said could be even more likely. honestly, this is not a good sign. i didn't like seeing that headline on the internet, but hopefully im just being a tad paranoid.

_________________
my bands- Lör
Top Hats and Effigies
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://myspace.com/halloflor
Gwonam
Mr. Game and Watch
Mr. Game and Watch
avatar

Number of posts : 650
Hedonistic Glory : 2330
Reputation : 27
Joined In : 2013-04-26
Age : 29

PostSubject: Re: huh?   Sun Jun 02, 2013 1:52 pm

I want to think that the governments of the world aren't stupid enough to use nuclear weapons to any capacity without the application of deterrence theory. They're still of the belief that they need to be attacked first in order to retaliate, but retaliation is even up for debate when you consider the possibility of decision making at a Hiroshima/Nagasaki level. I'm not sure Barack Obama has it in him to deliver a retaliatory nuclear strike without a the use of a large scale nuclear weapon on the US mainland, much less any other leader of any other nation. Right now, the closest thing to a rebel faction obtaining the ability to use a nuclear weapon was al-Qaeda, to which many governments are confident enough that military presence is the solution. In a sense, this is deterrence personified: using one power to check another.

You were correct about my assessment of deterrence being discarded in the event of smaller, so-called "limited range" weapons. The only reason people still care about nuclear weapons is that they're the most destructive weapon we as a species have crafted. When we create something more vile, it will be that which is applied to deterrence theory. I know Taxer would have a lot to say about the concept of proliferation and deterrence and how this affects macro-cultural psychology of a nation, a state, or a faction utilizing or discarding these weapons.

_________________
Squadala, we're off!
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_AWHOUHKN8
LOR
Ninja Viking Lord of the Pit of Despair and Stuff
Ninja Viking Lord of the Pit of Despair and Stuff
avatar

Number of posts : 7797
Hedonistic Glory : 11108
Reputation : 77
Joined In : 2010-05-01
Age : 25
Location : PA

PostSubject: Re: huh?   Sun Jun 02, 2013 2:20 pm

i cant even imagine what could be more vile. don't h-bombs potentially have an unlimited yeild? once someone figures out a weapon that can split the planet in half, im not sure its deterrence we have to worry about. biological warfare could be scary but I feel like that's a different animal altogether. that's a quiet gross death vs pure destruction. hopefully the planet realizes at a certain point that war is fucking stupid...especially since we have the capacity to kill everything

_________________
my bands- Lör
Top Hats and Effigies
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://myspace.com/halloflor
Gwonam
Mr. Game and Watch
Mr. Game and Watch
avatar

Number of posts : 650
Hedonistic Glory : 2330
Reputation : 27
Joined In : 2013-04-26
Age : 29

PostSubject: Re: huh?   Tue Jun 11, 2013 4:49 pm

I don't mean to necro this thread, but it is somewhat relevant.

Gwonam wrote:
How much longer until bureaus like the CIA and NSA go the way of the dinosaurs, or until other countries get the hint and start passing their programs off to companies that are governed by profit or motive contrary to the usual UN policies? They likely already have a similar system in place for this very reason.

This is why I said that line. I'm not going to say I called it or anything, but goddamn. That was quick.

It just goes to show how very fragile the intelligence divisions in the US really are. We'll be resorting to more in-house hires and the line between civilian and government employee is going to blur real soon, real fast. This is one man who had a mediocre position over the surveillance of every single one of us. Media spin be damned, the Patriot Act has run its course.

_________________
Squadala, we're off!
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_AWHOUHKN8
LOR
Ninja Viking Lord of the Pit of Despair and Stuff
Ninja Viking Lord of the Pit of Despair and Stuff
avatar

Number of posts : 7797
Hedonistic Glory : 11108
Reputation : 77
Joined In : 2010-05-01
Age : 25
Location : PA

PostSubject: Re: huh?   Tue Jun 11, 2013 7:47 pm

holy fuck, if that's true... i feel a whole lot less safe now.

_________________
my bands- Lör
Top Hats and Effigies
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://myspace.com/halloflor
Gwonam
Mr. Game and Watch
Mr. Game and Watch
avatar

Number of posts : 650
Hedonistic Glory : 2330
Reputation : 27
Joined In : 2013-04-26
Age : 29

PostSubject: Re: huh?   Tue Jun 11, 2013 11:33 pm

It's all over the news. He's on the run in Hong Kong and admitted wholeheartedly that he was a part of the same gluttonous system that masquerades as homeland security. To wiretap potential terrorists is one thing, but to thoroughly embark on an endeavor to keep an active directory on every human being in the nation with the acquisition of information from private sectors like Facebook and Google goes beyond defining Orwell.

This shit's dangerous. We've known that private industry such as ISPs do it as a form of anti-piracy on some grounds and overstep their boundaries in this regard as they don't necessitate a warrant, but the government actually going even further than this? It's no wonder Snowden blew the whistle.

He's become afraid of the monster he helped create and wants to do something about it before the surveillance of everybody in the States is a thing of normalcy. I don't mean to make a martyr out of the man, but the things he's leaked and how much he knows - not to mention the CIA director almost shitting himself on CNN - should be taken into consideration before more like him are made martyrs. Assange, Swartz, and now this guy? How many more people are there that have their hands in the family business that realize it's gone too far?

It goes to show that even the people doing this shit are sickened by what we've become.

_________________
Squadala, we're off!
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_AWHOUHKN8
LOR
Ninja Viking Lord of the Pit of Despair and Stuff
Ninja Viking Lord of the Pit of Despair and Stuff
avatar

Number of posts : 7797
Hedonistic Glory : 11108
Reputation : 77
Joined In : 2010-05-01
Age : 25
Location : PA

PostSubject: Re: huh?   Wed Jun 12, 2013 2:18 am

yeah since you've posted it, i just saw a bunch of shit on the news on it. fucking terrifying. what the fuck happens now?

_________________
my bands- Lör
Top Hats and Effigies
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://myspace.com/halloflor
Gwonam
Mr. Game and Watch
Mr. Game and Watch
avatar

Number of posts : 650
Hedonistic Glory : 2330
Reputation : 27
Joined In : 2013-04-26
Age : 29

PostSubject: Re: huh?   Wed Jun 12, 2013 9:20 am

I imagine either Hong Kong or China will do one of three things: integrate him into their national security programs, turn him over to United States authorities for a trial or he's found by the same organization he used to work for and he's rubbed out. Wetworks.

The frightening thing about their governments is that neither of them need Snowden beyond what he knows about the current surveillance programs installed in the States. They could with a few more steps do exactly what he did by tapping into the private sector, which knows no bounds. When Mark Zuckerberg and Larry Page aren't aware of the systems that crawl underneath them and how an educated IT employee could use that service to spy on just about anyone, it's only a matter of time before the obviously clumsy encryption methods that these classified organizations use come under their fire.

But the world at large isn't looking at the problem, they're looking at the man who created a solution at the behest of an organization, thinking that the problem will just go away if he does. Time and again, that's proven otherwise. It takes people to code and monitor these things, and the more companies like Google and Microsoft out there that are wildly successful in making off with personal information for the use of advertising strategy, the more that somebody will use this system for various crimes. But it doesn't end at social media. I iterate again how petrified the CIA director was on national news about it all, saying "no comment" to practically everything they asked about how insecure their surveillance system was while he shifted around like a child in a daycare. It's maddening how torn up these guys are.

_________________
Squadala, we're off!
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_AWHOUHKN8
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: huh?   

Back to top Go down
 
huh?
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Tip of the Hat :: Preposterous Palaver and Infinite Jest-
Jump to: