This isn’t the world I want to live in.

How long a dissertation would you like?

Sir Keir wasn’t on top form at PMQs today. Trump may well deliver some kind of peace for Russia and Ukraine. Still early days. One line comments on both Trump and Keir don’t help. Barleyfields

You are obviously a Trump supporter Jolene, and sadly deluded.

At least we have good leaders in President Trump and Sir Keir.
They need our confidence and encouragement.

Speaking to friends over 80 we all remember the Bay of Pigs incident and just one night when, separately, we all wondered whether we would wake up the next morning.
The position now with several apparently mentally disturbed leaders of nations and competent and caring statesman or women in short supply seems much more concerning. Sheer greed and over reliance on technology appears to be rocking the world.

Clarement an interesting idea but as the author of your link says, 'every so often the idea surfaces' - and that is all it is an idea, that someone thinks of and thinks through.

There is absolutely no evidence that this idea of limited nuclear attack has been seriously raised or considered by any country with access to nuclear weapons.

What is more it won't, because the first country that does that will be taken out by a large nuclear power with a large nuclear bonb. Not very pleasant I grant you. That would also apply if the country playing silly buggers was a large nuclear power.

Nobody wants nuclear war, the results would be too awful for everyone

Not keen on the alternative

Sorry Furret

What’s your alternative afurret ?

My father was in the Royal Navy (which is why I was born in Portsmouth). I was always very proud of him, handsome in his uniform and a thoroughly decent man.

You mentioned the Army, Claremont but you forget what is happening at sea and beneath the waves.

God bless the Royal Navy and those at sea, under-resourced and ignored by so many.
“If you wish for peace, prepare for war”

Is the world in a more dangerous place than it was throughout the cold war? Were you alive during the Bay of Pigs incident. What is happening now is nothing compared with that. Just because it ended OK doesn't diminish how dangerous it was.

Of course, it may not have ended well and the historical timeline would have told a different story.

Had we entered the Vietnam War, how many British Forces would have lost their lives or been injured? The converse is worth considering, too, for the Iraq War.

All of these incidents, and others, were sliding doors scenarios.

If gnawing on your knuckles makes you feel that you’re helping the situation, rock on

Seems like mocking to me.

Source link

www.apln.network/news/member_activities/dissecting-the-idea-of-limited-nuclear-war

''The most serious danger that lurks in making the case that limited nuclear wars are fightable, containable, and even winnable is a heightened temptation to use nuclear weapons. It could lead to the belief that worthwhile military or political objectives are achievable through managed nuclear use. But, as stated earlier, there can be no guarantee that a nuclear exchange between two nuclear weapon states will remain limited. It may. But then it may not, and that might prove to be a risk that is too risky. In fact, a perception that the adversary is indicating greater nuclear swagger by getting away with ‘limited’ nuclear use could generate a greater sense of vulnerability and raise the incentives for pre-emption. This would make a nuclear exchange more likely, not less likely. Therefore, the deterrence effects of showcasing limited nuclear use need to be evaluated with care.

In fact, besides increasing the chances of deterrence breakdown, the pursuit of nuclear war-fighting capabilities (even if ostensibly for the purpose of deterrence) through the greater accuracy of nuclear-tipped missiles, elaborate intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance infrastructure, and damage limitation defences would also be a financially exhausting exercise.

A third consequential challenge comes from the harm that limited nuclear war would cause to the taboo against the use of nuclear weapons. The conduct of nuclear use in which the first user is able to show a successful ability to keep nuclear war limited could set a precedent that others could be tempted to follow. It would ‘conventionalise’ the use of nuclear weapons and make it appear normal to use small nuclear weapons in ‘limited’ ways. If this were to happen against non-nuclear weapon states, such as Russian nuclear use against Ukraine or Chinese nuclear use against Taiwan, it could spur proliferation. Non-nuclear weapon states (NNWS) would face a renewed sense of insecurity. In such a scenario, one can expect them to want to acquire nuclear capabilities of their own. Meanwhile, a ‘successful’ nuclear exchange between two nuclear-armed states could open another pandora’s box.''

This is why the situation is currently very different.

thank you grammargran. Of course you haven't- but some did. And talk about mental illness, depression and medical help.

Yes, the Cuba crisis was the most dangerous time ever for the world, agreed. Other conflicts mentionned were terrible for those who lived locally, but did not threaten the whole world.

After the Cuban crisis, many of us became very active in campaining, very actively, against nuclear proliferation. And that felt positive and gave optimism.

But proliferation did happen, and nuclear weapons are now in so so many hands, and in the hands of those who are totally crazy, unbalanced and mad for power.

The other new factor, is the new concept of smaller nuclear weapons, that can be highly targeted, giving the impression to the above that a limited 'little' nuclear attack is possible. The MAD situation of the Cuban crisis has now gone, and this makes it all so so much more dangerous currently.

But thank you for your words. My post was never 'aimed' at you at all, of course.

claremont I am neither unkind nor inhuman, I am 85 years of age (yep, and I can almost hear you saying, she’s lucky, she’s lived her life.) But I will use these 85 years to say that I have lived through far more dangerous times, these are just different as they all were in their way. Nothing at the moment has come close to the Cuba missile crisis in the early 1960s, and all my teenage years and beyond were during the Cold War years when a wrong word by anyone could’ve tipped the world into war. My early years were spent in wartime and the austerity that followed, rationing went on for years afterwards. And much later there was the unrest in Northern Ireland which brought random bombings into mainland Britain. But you carry on, you enjoy life to the best of your ability and make sure you pass that ability to enjoy life on to the next generation. It is absolutely pointless worrying about things you cannot personally change, except at the ballot box. It is a waste of a life and if that makes me unkind or inhumane, I’m sorry you see it that way and it’s the last thing I would want.

Claremont

Those who mock and deride the real anxiety many feel currently about the state of the world, with real concerns, not for ourselves, but for our grandchildren, and all the children of the world- are hugely unkind and honestly, inhumane.

And no, the world has never been in such a dangerous situation. Anyone with ACs in the army must be aware.

I have never mocked or deride anyone, but decisions about the state of the world should be based on a proper assessment of the situation and an understanding of the times you are comparing it with, Look at some of my links in previous posts.

I understand people being worried about how things are, people worry about a wide range of subjects, but making inaccurate comparisons to support a case, is not helpful.

Is the world in a more dangerous place than it was throughout the cold war? Were you alive during the Bay of Pigs incident. What is happening now is nothing compared with that. Just because it ended OK doesn't diminish how dangerous it was. How does Gaza compare with the Holocaust?

I come from an army family, 3 generations of the family in the forces, 5 served in WW1, 4, including my maternal grandfather did not return. In WW2 my paternal grandfather and his seven sons all served in the army, miraculously all returned.My father served in the army for 25 years and we lived in countries facing insurgencies.

The Middle East as always is a powder keg. It is in the end a problem that can only be solved by those involved, and they show no desire to. Ukraine is alo frightening and, yes, anything could happen, but more dangerous than WW2, no, not really.

Those in the Forces, I mean, just to clarify.

No-one is mocking or deriding.

Some of us remember the realities.

If you have DC or DGC in the military, I can understand your heightened sense of anxiety, though Claremont, as those with family in any of the Forces, not just the Army, are well aware but would or should not be discussing this.

Those who mock and deride the real anxiety many feel currently about the state of the world, with real concerns, not for ourselves, but for our grandchildren, and all the children of the world- are hugely unkind and honestly, inhumane.

And no, the world has never been in such a dangerous situation. Anyone with ACs in the army must be aware.

M0nica Tue 11-Mar-25 16:30:11
Another good post.

Anyone who doesn't remember some of the horrors of the years even since WW2 is perhaps too young or took no interest in current affairs.

I should add - we are seeing politicians like Farage touting to be in charge of our country. Have we forgotten how much he said he admired Trump? Have we forgotten how he wanted to work in his government and repeatedly visited him in the USA instead of ministering to his own constituents?

Have we forgotten his words and the summer riots fuelled by untruths and hysterical migrant blaming?
Can anybody mention any good done in his constituency? Unlikely - yet if he cannot improve his constituency, how can he run this country.

It is scary - but the good people need to speak up because our own press is far from a 'free press' and many of the voting public, just like in the USA, only interested in reducing their taxes regardless of the real cost to the country. If we cannot keep an accurate moral compass we are not likely to head in the correct direction.

So what's new?'

One of the 'new' things is that there is no clear demarcation between right and wrong amongst some of the world's leaders. It is difficult to distinguish between the righteous and the terrorists. World leaders like Trump and Netanyahu behaving like thugs.

We are seeing untold damage done to the Palestinian people in Gaza while the US President puts a video out with go go dancers literally dancing on the graves of innocent civilians, the wreckage of hospitals and schools, while he is sipping cocktails with the Israeli President. Grotesque. We now see electricity cut off to Gaza making it impossible for them to get water purified or cook food or get heat. I'm talking about the surviving men women and children, already homeless and bereaved.
This is an attack on everybody, not on Hamas.
All this while an arrest warrant is out for Netanyahu for crimes against humanity and while the US President is a convicted felon, proven liar who actually tried to incite riots to disrupt democracy in America.
As for Trump now siding with Putin, a former KGB agent, a corrupt and immoral man who tracks and kills his citizens who speak against him in our country, in the air or wherever he can get them.

Who are the good? Who are the bad? That is what is new - parts of the world that we considered 'civilised democracies' are being led by 'the bad' and they were voted in - and prepared to sell everybody out for their god - money!

My interest in politics and current affairs started when I was 4. I could read and read the papers every day. My parents did try and stop me reading some of the worst things, but had little success. If I wanted to read some thing I did.

Someone, David, I think mentioned how few big events there were in his childhood, and completely forgets that through out that time we lived with the very real fear of nuclear war. Civil Defence sent leaflets to every house, films were made that the BBC banned because their graphic recreation of what was likely to happen was too terrifying.

There was the Korean War, the wars that racked Indo-China from 1945 to the end of the Vietnam war in the late 1960s. There was the Russian subjection of Eastern Europe; the Hungarian Uprising, of 1956, brutally repressed by Russian tanks, The Prague Spring of 1968, once again crushed by the Russians, the Suez Crisis, and these are just the ones that ocur to me with little thought.

Then there was the partition of India, the establishment of a Jewish state, that has left the Middle East destabilised ever since and led to several further wars, the revolution in CHina that brought Mao Tse Tung to power and the threat to caused to international stability, the break up of the Soviet Union.

So much has been happening that even the slightest intelligent perusal of reliable news sources, should make people understand that, at the moment we are close to being as peaceful as we have every been, although we are now facing a couple of large events in Ukraine and the middle east, that could destabilise the current peaceful balance.