Pea Brains

The USA has nuclear weapons, and it's very important that whoever is running things there has a good idea of what their use would mean.

In total numbers, they have 1790 deployed (sitting on fuelled and ready ICBMs), and more than another 5000 piled up, but that would need a bit of preparation prior to use. The active ones are currently all aimed at Russia. These have to be ready to go at a moment's notice, as an ICBM launched from Moscow towards Washington would arrive in between 20 and 30 minutes. If they wait until after incoming missiles actually arrive, there ability to strike back will be hugely compromised. The USA maintains fleets of spy satellites constantly watching Russian missile silos for evidence of a launch, and also watching world trouble spots for evidence of nuclear weapon use. So do the Russian.

To give you some idea of how deadly the US nuclear arsenal is, detonation of 100 average-sized nuclear weapons would be enough to extinguish all human life. They wouldn't need to go off over any particular target. That many going off anywhere on earth would paint the planet with radiation, and eject enough material into the atmosphere to trigger a blocking out of the sun world-wide. This is called nuclear winter, and would destroy all the crops on earth. Even those not killed by the explosions or radiation would starve to death in the cold and dark, which would last for years. The USA could do this easily 17 times over with their deployed warheads, and 50 times more with their stockpiles. They could kill us all 67 times over.

So could Russia. They have 1790 deployed warheads and 7300 in reserve. I bet somebody reading this will compare the Russian numbers to the American and say, “The USA is behind. They should make more.” What are you, stupid? The USA can kill us 67 times over, while the Russians can do it 90 times over, but that doesn't matter. Once you are comfortably past the ability to kill everyone on earth, no greater capacity makes any sense at all.

Next on the list is France. They can kill us all almost 6 times over. Britain can do it almost 4 times over. China could kill us all more than twice.

Then come the more recent members of the nuclear club. India can kill us all (110-120 warheads), as can Pakistan (120-130 warheads).

Israel is the only secret member of the club, although it's a very open secret. Estimates put their pile at anywhere from 60 to 400 warheads.

The newest and wackiest nuclear power is North Korea, with most likely less than 10 warheads. A strange thing about the North Koreans is that the world is worried about their ability to produce long-range missiles. The world is missing the point. If they just set the warheads off where they are, within North Korea, they would pretty much devastate Japan with the resulting clouds of radioactive dust. Japan is down wind of North Korea.

But I diverge, and will get back to the thesis of an American president needing to understand things about nuclear arms.

New presidents have lots of people who try to get them to understand, and so far they all have. None have threatened to use nuclear weapons, let alone used them other than the two atomic (small) bombs dropped on Japan in World War Two.

The USA and Russia (originally the Soviet Union, but the policy continues in Russia) keep their missiles aimed at each other and have made it abundantly clear that should either launch even one, it would be met with full retaliation. What that means is that if Russia launches a single shot at the USA, every available American nuclear weapon would be fired at Russia in response, and vice versa. They have also made it clear that a nuclear weapon used against an ally would be considered a direct attack against the USA or Russia. If Russia launches missiles at, say Italy, it would be met by complete US retaliation.

This policy is called Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) and has keep the nuclear powers too afraid of destruction to use their arsenals at all.

Every so often there is some crisis somewhere in the world, and somewhere in the USA some pea-brain will suggest nuking the bastards.

Let's say there is just such an event, in some country Russia cares nothing at all about, and American President Pea Brain launches a single nuclear missile at that country's capital city. It is kept secret. The Russians detect the launch, and in the handful of minutes available to them for analysis, they have to wonder about possible undetected parallel launches, and almost undetectable launches from ICBM-carrying submarines. Is it an American launch against them? The most likely result will be full retaliation, by Russia, met by a full launch by the USA.

Same scenario, but this time the USA says they're going to do it. Very likely the Russians will say that if they do so Russia will launch full retaliation. If they don't get the USA to back down, the genie is out of the bottle and will never go back in. Will the USA back down and not launch? If President Pea Brain was stupid enough to do this in the first place, there is an excellent chance he will push ahead. The most likely result will be full launches by both Russia and the USA.

A very realistic version of the scenarios would be regarding Iran. Elements within the USA are so afraid of the Iranians getting nuclear weapons that they want to stop them militarily. The unspoken threat has been American use of nuclear weapons. Let's say they make some kind of prior deal with the Russians, and blow up the Iranian capital of Tehran. Neighbouring Pakistan panics and launches all of theirs, which are currently aimed at India, who launches back. The world dies a couple of times over.

Or another one. President Pea Brain decides to go after North Korea's nuclear capability with nuclear strikes. They try and get Russian agreement, and also neighbouring China. Why on earth would either of them give a green light to the USA nuclear bombing North Korea? The most likely outcome would be the world dies again.

And if, in any of the scenarios, if the world doesn't end, is there an upside? Let's assume the USA uses a nuke on somebody small, and nobody launches anything else at anybody else.

The result would not be even slightly good. The only countries safe from President Pea Brain's treats of power would be those with nuclear arsenals. Countries may be stupid, but they are smart enough to see that. It might mean that, say, Jamaica would have to put up with a new reality, but many countries wouldn't. How long to you think it would take any of the western industrialized countries to go nuclear if they wanted to do so in a hurry? Japan? Germany? Canada? Within months the number of nuclear powers would grow from 9 to dozens. How lovely would that be, especially in a world where use of such weapons has become the status quo?

Fortunately, in the real world the genie is in the bottle. Use of nuclear weapons has been off the table for over 70 years.

Best to keep it that way.