Lion of the Blogosphere

Remember when people used to worry about nuclear war?

If you’re not old enough to at least remember the 1980s, the answer is probably “no.”

The end of people worrying about nuclear war was a necessary precursor to people worrying about “climate change.” People’s brains only have so much bandwidth allocated for worrying about stuff like that, and at the same time, there’s a void there that needs to be filled with something to worry about.

Nuclear war seems to me like a much more sensible thing to worry about than “climate change.” Nuclear weapons are a real thing, as the Japanese certainly know, and the amount of mass destruction that a global nuclear war might cause could be pretty catastrophic. “Climate change” is just bogus pseudoscience.

Click to link to view the Google Ngram Viewer

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

September 20, 2019 at EDT pm

Posted in Science

143 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. It’s even worse, now people worry, or scold everyone, whichever, about transgender bathrooms and is someone culturally appropriating something and white privilege and on and on. Because there is nothing else to worry about.

    Patrick Wahl

    September 20, 2019 at EDT pm

  2. There’s media sources saying that the Red Chinese are on their way in becoming the Romulans in real life with their cloaking technology.

    Can they cloak their nuclear weapons and aim at us without detection? Sounds like a scary scenario.

    Ok, what, who's this again?

    September 20, 2019 at EDT pm

    • Nobody believes me, but our own local cops have cloaking. I saw them disappear right in front of me as they were guarding a TOOS playground.

      You know me

      September 20, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Proles have a sweet life being the police in a wealthy enclave. Yeah, occasionally stuff happens like a drunk idiot who DUI or a fighting at the bar, and maybe a family murder over money once in a blue moon, but overall, they have plenty of downtime.

        Ok, what, who's this again?

        September 21, 2019 at EDT am

  3. And even nuclear war itself is way overblown:
    How many nukes does it take to destroy the world?

    All “end of the world” scares are essentially religion.

    guest

    September 20, 2019 at EDT pm

    • Very true. Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs only affected the cities themselves. The tests on the fusion bombs kind of wrecked a few obscure Pacific atolls.

      Chernobyl released a lot more radiation.

      Frau Katze

      September 20, 2019 at EDT pm

      • It depends what models of radiation danger you believe. The governments will all say basically nobody has died from nuclear industry radiation. Some groups conclude that over three million died from Chernobyl, and higher numbers in total from all the 50s open air atomic tests. They just died years later of seemingly unconnected heart attacks and cancer. The spike in child thyroid cancer in Japan is already obviously statistically significant, and etymologists and ornithologists are clearly documenting all the animal mutations. A full nuclear war would probably have a huge fraction of humanity sick and keeling over of cancer for decades.

        Guys like Stephen Cohen are saying the odds of a nuclear war with Russia are higher now than they ever were during the cold war, but the American public is totally oblivious. Americans don’t realize how freaked out the Russians are by all the NATO activity on their borders.

        bobbybobbob

        September 21, 2019 at EDT am

      • Must have been you Bob who got me to read Cohen’s book. Very eye opening, though I suppose he’s considered a Russian apologist by the usual suspects.

        Mrs Stitch

        September 21, 2019 at EDT am

      • @bobbybobob Yes, it’s openly admitted about the thyroid cancer. I strongly suspect that it has caused other cancers too, although their government won’t follow it up. The amount of radiation released was enormous. It spread too, carried by wind.

        Did the bombs in Japan cause thyroid cancer across the country at large?

        I’m sure many who survived the initial blasts succumbed later to a radiation related cancer later. It would be inevitable. I’m not saying nuclear war is safe.

        I have no idea how probable a nuclear was is though. I don’t want to say it couldn’t happen. But the state of affairs seems much quieter than during the Cuban missile crisis.

        To predict that such a war would involve the entire world seems way too much.

        But there have been people worrying for decades. What’s that clock group, that keeps moving the minute handle closer to midnight?

        Maybe I’ve grown complacent since the earlier dire predictions never came to pass. You may be a lot younger than me. I remember constant fretting during the Communist era.

        The usual people of that era seems to be a lot quieter now. I can’t see Russia starting a nuclear war. More likely other parts of the world. Perhaps Iran vs Israel.

        Frau Katze

        September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

      • NUKEMAP to the rescue! Choose a location, input the bomb size (you can choose from a list of popular sizes if you prefer), choose ground burst (fallout) or air burst (no fallout but greater destruction radius), and you can see the destructive effects of blast including expected deaths.
        https://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/

        Peter

        ironrailsironweights

        September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

    • Look at what a mess Chernobyl made.

      Rosenmops

      September 21, 2019 at EDT am

      • Yep, and the radiation was blown west to the rest of Europe. If you look at maps it’s splotchy. Did the wind blow, and did it rain? Then you’ve got a hot spot. There was enough radiation that an employee of a Swedish reactor triggered an alarm as he was heading into work. At first they thought it was something as that particular reactor. But then reports came from other reactors in Sweden.

        Swedish scientists analyzed the fallout. From the elements & the isotopes present they quickly knew it was not a bomb, but something from a nuclear reactor. They could even tell how far along in the cycle (i.e. how new were the uranium rods?).

        It was falling all over Sweden and their diplomats began to demand an explanation from the USSR. So much for Soviet attempts to cover it up. The reindeer in northern Sweden couldn’t be eaten because they chomping on radioactive grass. The Swedes arranged for importing clean hay.

        Finland likely knew too. I read a book by a nuclear scientist, James Mahaffey. He heard through the grapevine that the Finns noticed the same as Swedes but didn’t want to be the ones to badger the USSR.

        Frau Katze

        September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Another Soviet-Western difference: Western reactors have radiation meters all over the place. They can measure small or large amounts. They have them out the reactor grounds in the air too. Everyone knows how dangerous radiation is.

        In the USSR people were taught that radiation wasn’t dangerous. One of the problems after the explosion was lack of meters. They had only a few that could measure a small amount. The needles hit the right hand side and stayed there. No one knew where to find other meters that could measure the amounts they were getting. They didn’t know how much radiation they were absorbing.

        It was against the law in the USSR for an individual to own a radiation meter. As scientists came in from across the country some had better meters, often obtained from the West.

        Frau Katze

        September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

  4. I remember the Cuban missile crisis. Except we lived in a town that didn’t have TV (northern B.C.) No doubt parents didn’t want to alarm their kids.

    There was a family in the town that decided to move to New Zealand. Apparently the air doesn’t change hemisphere much. The most distinct thing I remember was this family.

    Americans would remember more. They were the named target, and the schools taught the kids to get under their desks. They held practice drills.

    Frau Katze

    September 20, 2019 at EDT pm

    • I, too, am old enough to remember the Cuban missile crisis. I was in high school, and I recall, when school let out, people saying goodbye with the customary “See you tomorrow” and then adding, half joking, “If there IS a tomorrow.”

      However, except for that one moment, I don’t think I or anyone I knew ever spent even a minute worrying about nuclear war. It was just too enormous to conceive of.

      Simon

      September 20, 2019 at EDT pm

      • There was a lot of worry about it in the 1980s, because – like “climate change” now – the media was pushing it really hard as a way to criticize a Republican president.

        Lehuster

        September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

    • Was that Quesnel? In 1962, after we had moved to West Van, I remember someone at school telling me that if a person in China pushed a button that the world would blow up. I asked my parents if it was true. As I recall they indicated that it was true, but that no one in China would push the button because if they did, they would blow themselves up too. I was not reassured. I was in grade 2 then. In high school they made us read the book “Hiroshima”. It had graphic descriptions of people with skin falling off, etc. I was scared for years after that.

      Rosenmops

      September 21, 2019 at EDT am

      • Look I am not saying nuclear war is a pleasant thing. Clearly a single bomb per city in Japan completely leveled them causing huge death tolls that went on for years because of the nature of radiation.

        The incendiary bombing of other Japanese cities completely wrecked them and huge numbers of civilians died. But at least if you survived the bombing you were safe (unlike with the nukes).

        It seems that leaders didn’t care about civilian deaths in WW 2. That seems different now. The news media goes insane if a single Palestinian civilian is killed by Israel, causing the terrorists to engineer that outcome by using them as human shields.

        Maybe people decided in retrospect that killing huge number of civilians did not advance war goals at all. The thinking was that the civilians would somehow stop the war. But they no such power in Japan or Germany.

        A group in Germany even tried to kill Hitler but they narrowly missed. Security was ratcheted up a good deal after that.

        I read Hiroshima too but it never occurred to me that I would be a target.

        Frau Katze

        September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

      • @Frau

        Hiroshima and Nagasaki caused the Japanese to surrender.

        Rosenmops

        September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

      • @Rosenmops I quite aware of how Japan surrendered after Nagasaki. I half expected someone to start ranting about the bombs. So I have arguments up my sleeve.

        All the same, it was a bad time. By sheer coincidence, I have a newsreel of both cities after the bombing on Blazing Cat Fur’s September 20 Evening Photos. I decided a historic video might be a nice addition.

        I was in a hurry and I grabbed the first one I found that would let me embed it. I was too tired to study the set of vids. It’s takes a while to find the photos too.

        You might want to avoid it. It’s grim but it was a very grim war.

        On a more positive note check Sep 21, with a photo of the Cutty Sark in dry dock, one of the last clipper ships. It’s very similar to the Thermopylae, that’s the painting above my desk: the Thermopylae leaving Shang Hai Harbour. The tug boats are burning coal. Age of Sail was nearly over,

        The Cutty Sark was named after a fairy or something like that from a Robert Burns poem. It’s now a museum.

        I’m going to find some more photos. I could try photographing the painting. Or may it’s on the web somewhere. It’s more cheerful than bombed cities. Another reader mentioned the Robert Burns poem.

        Even more cheerful, a puppy video in three day.

        Frau Katze

        September 22, 2019 at EDT am

  5. I’m guessing we’ll see nuclear weapons used sometime in the next 50 years. Because yeah, not enough people worry seriously about them anymore, and too many countries have them now. The technology isn’t cutting edge military tech anymore, it’s almost 100 years old now.

    But I don’t think we’ll see a full on nuclear war. Just one or two nuclear explosions and then a cease-fire, as people remember again just how bad these things are.

    ack-acking

    September 20, 2019 at EDT pm

    • >as people remember again just how bad these things are.

      I believe just the opposite will happen, it will be a big dud, the destruction will be much less than what you expected it to be, it wont be world ending nor city busting, nothing will pulverize, it will be much different from what you see in movies, and that will break the nuclear ceiling for even more use of tactical nukes!

      guest

      September 20, 2019 at EDT pm

    • This has a reasonable chance of being true.

      Worth remembering that the W. Bush administration did some work on a nuclear bunker buster to target the Tora Bora.caves, but the idea was politically unpopular and they killed it. Tactically though, it sounds like it might have been immensely useful, and I have to wonder if some government will revisit the idea again when dealing with some tough-to-bomb site, whether it’s a place like Tora Bora, or even a hostile government’s hardened underground facility (like Iran’s nuclear facilities).

      Wency

      September 20, 2019 at EDT pm

      • I would be shocked and disappointed if the government were not still working on a nuclear bunker buster. One can easily envision scenarios when you would really really need one (North Korea for example).

        Mike Street Station

        September 21, 2019 at EDT am

    • More likely another reactor failure. China and India are building reactors like crazy.

      I’m kind of surprised how few bad accidents have occurred. Three Mile Island was a partial meltdown. But very little radiation got out. The containment building did its job. Even the reactor vessel did not fail.

      Expensive and serious but not life threatening.

      As for Fukushima, the problem is putting a reactor on this very seismically active island. And putting it at sea level. After all, one word the Japanese gave the world was “tsunami”. WTF were they thinking!?

      They put it at sea level to use sea water for cooling (rather than cooling towers).

      Frau Katze

      September 20, 2019 at EDT pm

      • I didn’t know India had reactors. Scary. But then Pakistan has the bombs.

        Rosenmops

        September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

    • > Just one or two nuclear explosions and then a cease-fire, as people remember again just how bad these things are.

      I think this is likely in the case a tiff between the USG and CCP spirals out of control, but in most other flash points I can think of it probably wouldn’t happen like that.

      Russia has an explicitly stated policy that they will launch a full scale nuclear assault before losing a war on or near Russian soil. They are absolutely serious about it and have essentially built their military posture around massive nuclear strike. A China vs. Russia scenario is arguably as likely as a USA vs Russia scenario in the coming decades.

      Saudi vs. Iran, Pakistan vs. India, NK vs. Japan, etc: in these different flash points I think things could very well devolve into total wars of annihilation. The USG risking a nuclear conflict actually might be the least likely scenario. More likely just a bunch of fallout from one of these overseas blood feuds drifts over us.

      bobbybobbob

      September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

  6. At a different level, antisemitsim has been falling since 1995 as islamophobia was surging.

    Bruno

    September 20, 2019 at EDT pm

  7. I just read an article about Greta Thunberg.

    Kid’s sick.

    gothamette

    September 20, 2019 at EDT pm

    • Her parents should be put in a prison for few years for child abuse.

      My 2¢

      September 20, 2019 at EDT pm

    • Gotham-meister: what makes you say the kid’s sick? Is it the autism or something else?

      njguy73

      September 20, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Her mother’s book. The whole family is crazy.

        We may have to pry Sweden off the face of the earth and shoot it into outer space.

        gothamette

        September 21, 2019 at EDT am

    • She really is. The mother seems crazy.

      Rosenmops

      September 21, 2019 at EDT am

    • She’s an aspie kid. It’s her parents who are the monsters.

      Mike Street Station

      September 21, 2019 at EDT am

      • Right. I paid no attention to her until recently then I read up.

        Her mom wrote a book spilling all these family issues and it’s disgusting. Apparently both daughters have mental problems. But it’s the parents who really are monsters, as you say.

        gothamette

        September 21, 2019 at EDT am

      • Normal parents with a kid on the spectrum would see about getting their kid into life-skills classes. In my neck of the woods, there’s a farm run by persons with autism. Some live there, others just work there. They grow produce for a local farmer’s market, and make all sorts of products from hand-woven blankets to goat’s-milk soap.

        They’re more green than all the climate activists ever could be. But you don’t see them on the cover of Time.

        njguy73

        September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

  8. I’m old enough to remember “Save the Whales!”

    E. Rekshun

    September 20, 2019 at EDT pm

  9. Not 5 minutes ago I passed 3 elementary school kids with signs protesting climate change, in downtown Mill Valley. Maybe I’ve just forgotten but I don’t remember kids that age having been enlisted in protests against nukes.

    Marty

    September 20, 2019 at EDT pm

    • Forgot one thing: the kids got a solidarity honk from the vehicle in front me – a Range Rover HSE.

      Marty

      September 20, 2019 at EDT pm

    • They were.

      Curles

      September 20, 2019 at EDT pm

    • They were in the USSR.

      gothamette

      September 20, 2019 at EDT pm

    • 80s kids were notoriously apathetic towards politics and activism. Didn’t mean we weren’t anxious. I’ll bet the people who disrespected “slackers” back in the day wish SJW nutjobs today would slack a little more.

      ujkf

      September 20, 2019 at EDT pm

      • 80s kids were more concerned with actual dangers, like getting sucked into parallel universes.

        njguy73

        September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Or an economy with no place for them. Turns out they may have been onto something, njguy73.

        gothamette

        September 22, 2019 at EDT am

    • Parkland High demonstrated the effectiveness of using children as your propaganda weapons. We’ll see more and more kids thrown on the front lines of social hysteria as a result.

      Mike Street Station

      September 21, 2019 at EDT am

    • Involving children is wrong. Trying to be sentimental or what? This is an adult matter. Children know only enough to repeat what they’re told. And that’s it.

      Frau Katze

      September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

      • John Nolte of Breitbart has an article about driving kids crazy about adult problems.

        I do happen to believe that industrial civilization is very destructive of the environment, but the problem has to be approached rationally, not religiously.

        Standard disclaimer: I often disagree w/Nolte’s “aesthetic” tastes; he’s a real show-biz stooge, but in this case he’s totally on target.I also hope that most of the kids who get sucked into this madness are just there to cut classes and smoke cigs. This may be the only time I ever recommend that anyone smoke.

        https://www.breitbart.com/environment/2019/09/21/only-monster-afflict-children-eco-anxiety/

        gothamette

        September 22, 2019 at EDT am

      • @Gothamette, I found your answer, thanks, I do not trust Salon et al and that includes NYT now. That editor Dean Baquet needs to be fired,

        Frau Katze

        September 22, 2019 at EDT am

  10. I certainly worried about it and had recurrent dreams about the world ending. My parents were divorced and my brothers gone and I think kids like me worried way more than we should have. Esp with no intelligent person to talk to about it. My mother said it would all happen so fast we wouldn’t know what hit us. Lol, how comforting!

    People were pretty much in escapist mode. I went into music but should have gone to college.

    Mrs Stitch

    September 20, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Oh man Shouting Thomas, yeah that’s how it was…I remember theTwilight Zone ep where the frantic neighbors came to break down the door to get in the fallout shelter. Is it any wonder I spent the next 30 years playing/drinking in casinos and bars?

        The media really did a number on us. Then there was a big peace movement. Funny that.

        Mrs Stitch

        September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

    • I didn’t worry at all in the Cuban missile crisis. Of course I was in Canada in a northern with no TV. Canada wasn’t a target per se but we are rather close to the US.

      Still, no kids seemed worried. The parents all downplayed it so as not to worry us is the only explanation. But there was that family that moved to New Zealand. But none of us kids was worried.

      Maybe Rosenmops was, but I know our parents didn’t try to scare us. What would be the point, after all? No one could do anything about it.

      I can’t judge your mother. I don’t know how American parents handled it. But I would not have said that. I would have tried to downplay it, saying, maybe, we don’t even know if anything will even happen. And it would only affect a small area. Don’t scare children. I mean yes, scare them if necessary, like about not going off with strangers. My mom did that.

      Frau Katze

      September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

      • “ if there were a nuclear attack, how would crouching under my desk save me?“

        Right. I remember being led to a bomb shelter while in kindergarten. Of course, the weirder angle is that the school was zoned adjacent to a Strategic Air Command air base. As in the runway with the planes sitting there was separated from the school by a wire fence. Gotta love ‘50s’60s zoning.

        Curle

        September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

    • I never believed one word of “duck and cover.”

      At age 5, I would crouch under my desk and say, “What is this shit?”

      First, if there were a nuclear attack, how would crouching under my desk save me? We all figured that one out fast, duh. Five year olds.

      Second, I just never believed it.

      gothamette

      September 22, 2019 at EDT am

  11. “You’re missing a carrier? Are you sure? Okay…well, yelling…please stop yelling, Dmitry. Yes, thank you. You said there was some sort of gamma-ray burst somewhere? The what? The straights of what? Hormuz? Hormuz! Okay. Please, Dmitry. Please, Dmitry. Let’s be civil…. You’re not…you’re not the only person missing a carrier around here, Dmitry. What? Of course I respect you! You know I do!”

    raoulduke2767

    September 20, 2019 at EDT pm

  12. Michael Crichton made this point in State of Fear:

    Dave Pinsen

    September 20, 2019 at EDT pm

  13. The end of people worrying about nuclear war was a necessary precursor to people worrying about “climate change.” People’s brains only have so much bandwidth allocated for worrying about stuff like that, and at the same time, there’s a void there that needs to be filled with something to worry about.

    Wow….i feel like a philosophical tome could be written on this topic alone.

    Keep in mind that I believe global warming is real.

    GondwanaMan

    September 20, 2019 at EDT pm

  14. There is a reason to fear nuclear war. If it starts, it itself will not kill nearly as many people as those who fear it as a sort of armageddon think will be killed. Once the nuclear war starts, and then quickly fizzles out, it will be used as an excuse to fight a conventional world war. The latter would be much closer to an armageddon.

    My dad had a theory, based on his closeup observance of the massive incompetence in the military as an artillery soldier during the Korean War: most of the missiles would fail to launch or wouldn’t work properly once they were launched. Many would not get a chance to launch at all because those charged with their launching would panic and @#% up, or desert. We can assume the enem(ies) would have the same problem. Therefore, only a few would reach their targets and kill a lot of people in those unlucky places. The lucky many survivors in other population centers would know what had happened (word gets out about Hiroshima-type stuff), and the fear and rage they felt would not be assuaged with anything less than a real, conventional war that would be a bigger nightmare than anything cooked up by the Atomic Cafe bunch. That was his theory, and I couldn’t argue with it because, after all, he had been in the artillery and I hadn’t.

    Atomic Cafeteria Worker

    September 20, 2019 at EDT pm

    • During the Cold War we regularly tested our missiles and thus had a pretty good idea of their reliability. We also had hundreds of bombers, and we knew they worked because we already flew them every day. Seems unlikely that a nuclear war would have fizzled completely. Moreover, both sides had thousands of weapons, so even with a very high failure rate, you’d still have hundreds of nuclear weapons going off in the USA and USSR. Definitely a catastrophe for both sides. If you look at old studies of “limited” nuclear war, with “only” a few tens of weapons used on each side, it was still pretty bad (millions dead) for the victim of the “limited” strike.

      Lehuster

      September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

    • >>My dad had a theory, based on his closeup observance of the massive incompetence in the military as an artillery soldier during the Korean War: most of the missiles would fail to launch or wouldn’t work properly once they were launched

      This doesn’t sound right. The vast majority of payload delivered in the Korean war was by howitzer, not missile/rocket. 2) American artillery was devastatingly effective in Korea, as it was in Vietnam. After China entered the war and chased the American/UN forces back down the peninsula, in battle after battle in 1951 artillery saved the day and slaughtered tens of thousands of Chinese and North Korean forces enabling the US/UN forces to stabilize the situation. High explosive artillery is a late 19th century early 20th century battlefield technology but, even today, it is extremely effective.

      Daniel H

      September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Ok, I already regret my post because it makes my dad look bad and me look cowardly for hiding behind him because I assembled a few idle remarks he made at the dinner table when I was 10 into a “theory” that is actually mine and not his.

        That said, I have no faith in technology. The things that work in our society work because vast armies of competent people make them work. These technological THINGS, including all AIs and that crap, will become inert and inactive the second a human being whose master or servant they are doesn’t come into work.

        Kill, Robots, Kill! Er, I mean, Kill Robots!

        September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

      • I know less about the specifics of the korean war than you, but the general thrust of the parent argument sounds about right. Most of this stuff people think will work when war breaks out, won’t actually work. Huge scandals in USAF at the minuteman silos recently, if you didn’t know. USN is struggling to keep the carrier fleet operational. A “carrier” strike group deployed without the Truman carrier last week, which is farcical. The picket ships without the air wing on the carrier are sitting ducks. A CSG is a cohesive system that makes zero sense without the carrier. Followed the EMALS scandal on the Ford class? We allegedly have a commissioned carrier, except nothing about it actually works.

        The recurring pattern in American warfare (not this utterly pointless post 9/11 middle east bullshit) for literally 250 years is: a war breaks out, Then everybody at the top of the command structure gets fired in recurring waves as it turns out that nothing planned actually works. Eventually younger smarter guys figure out what works. I see no reason to expect anything different for WWIII.

        I think it’s very likely that the grandpa in the original comment is correct that when the order is given, half the time nobody turns the launch keys, and then half the time the missiles don’t correctly launch. And then half the time no detonation on target.

        When India and Pakistan go to nuclear war maybe 3% of the stuff actually works. They’ll mostly be hacking at each other with axes.

        bobbybobbob

        September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

      • “The recurring pattern in American warfare (not this utterly pointless post 9/11 middle east bullshit) for literally 250 years is: a war breaks out, Then everybody at the top of the command structure gets fired in recurring waves as it turns out that nothing planned actually works. Eventually younger smarter guys figure out what works. I see no reason to expect anything different for WWIII.”

        That IS the pattern in American military history, but excluding the post 9/11 wars excludes a warning. The American military, I mean it’s combat arms, has an extremely high level of actual combat experience. The NCO and Officer Corps has plenty of people with combat experience. It’s the most battle tested force we’ve had in decades…and yet, the usual winnowing of stupid and incompetence did not happen. Just like peace time, the political lackies were promoted, and the people who actually knew what they were doing got cashiered. For whatever reason, the start of the war culling of the incompetents didn’t happen, they continued to cull the competent people. The consequences are that a primitive force in Afghanistan has beaten the most powerful military in world history to a standstill, and the military leadership seems clueless as to what to do about it.

        Mike Street Station

        September 22, 2019 at EDT am

  15. Hope it kills pelicans soon. Private jets flying over my head in just one hour burn jet fuel enough to produce all straws consumed nationally in one year!

    My 2¢

    September 20, 2019 at EDT pm

  16. I entirely agree with Mr Lion. Nuclear war is a far greater threat to the world than climate change. If schoolchildren the world over (and BTW its really only white children) were protesting about nuclear weapons then I think it would be justified and could do some good since leaders like Trump and Putin and even Xi might be shamed into having some kind of summit or other. Nuclear weapons are like cigarettes, the evidence is overwhelming that there is nothing good about them. Whereas the climate change issue is like booze.

    martin2

    September 20, 2019 at EDT pm

  17. There was a popular slogan among lefty ban-the-Bomb peaceniks during the Cold War — “You can’t hug a child with nuclear arms.”

    Oswald Spengler

    September 20, 2019 at EDT pm

    • That definitely rings a bell but I can’t remember where I heard.

      The possibility of nukes was in that air until the USSR collapsed.

      Fighting among various small groups broke out but no nukes were involved. Even Chechnya could be and was flattened easily with non-atomic weapons.

      And remember all the time the USSR was in Afghanistan? No nukes there either.

      Why are so many readers worrying about nukes?

      Frau Katze

      September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

  18. O/t – Regarding the NY Post article on the death of the father and son pair’s fall into the abyss, they seem like your typical middle class Irish types from Connecticut. The son looks like one of those that I see a lot in Manhattan, especially in the Lower East and East Village as hipsters and are usually not that bright.

    Ok, what, who's this again?

    September 20, 2019 at EDT pm

  19. I’m wondering about fears that have come and gone, waxed and waned, over the years.

    Off the top of my head: Y2K; mad cow disease; lead paint; asbestos; asteroids hitting the earth; various radiation fears (brain cancer from cell phones); contaminated household goods (Tylenol poisonings); shortage of landfill space; birth defects from chemicals; day care molestation; overhead power line health concerns; acid rain.

    bomag

    September 20, 2019 at EDT pm

    • None of those fears were as great as nuclear war in the 1980s or climate change now.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      September 21, 2019 at EDT am

    • A big fear in the 70’s was the population bomb. We were all predicted to starve.

      Rosenmops

      September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

  20. My pet peeve is, nowadays people can’t stop laughing about duck and cover exercises, it’s so hilarious.

    Obviously no one thought that if kids were caught directly at ground zero of a nuclear detonation, hiding under their desks would save them. But what if your kids happen to be at the periphery of the blast radius? In that case, the biggest threat they might face could be damage to the building they’re in or windows breaking and showering them with glass. If there’s a chance that taking cover might help them, then why not?

    Nowadays, we’re free to think of this as ridiculous and laugh about it if we want, because we don’t have to worry about actually trying to keep children safe in case of actual nuclear war.

    Blue Tribe Dissident

    September 21, 2019 at EDT am

    • I’d say that for those in the Pacific Northwest, a disastrous earthquake is far more likely than nukes. You heard about the extremely bad one in the 1700s?

      It will happen again. Maybe next week, maybe next year, maybe next century, maybe maybe… But we can’t do anything about it.

      I’m kind of worried about how about far above sea level my son and his family are. The 1700s one caused a massive tsunami.

      Frau Katze

      September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

    • “Nowadays, we’re free to think of this as ridiculous and laugh about it if we want, because we don’t have to worry about actually trying to keep children safe in case of actual nuclear war.”

      What? The bombs are still there. There is still tension.

      Rosenmops

      September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Yeah right, no disastrous earthquakes in your neck of the woods. You don’t suddenly notice the building swaying, get on Twitter and find out if was a small local quake.

        That one south of Seattle was much worse. A four story earthquake reinforced building was shaking back and forth. Scary, you bet.

        Frau Katze

        September 22, 2019 at EDT am

      • I worry about an earthquake at the coast. I’ve got kids and grandkids in Vancouver and Victoria. I worry a lot but I have never worried about global warming, Anything the UN is involved with is likely a corrupt scam.

        Rosenmops

        September 22, 2019 at EDT am

    • Nobody cares about children during an actual war. New children are born after the war. This is what after war baby boom is for.

      My 2c

      September 22, 2019 at EDT am

      • I can’t tell if this is meant to be serious. The baby boom was caused by men returning from overseas. It wasn’t to replace kids killed in the war.

        Rosenmops

        September 22, 2019 at EDT am

      • You probably did not live through the actual war around you. Parents under stress care less about their children. This is why baby and child mortality goes up like crazy. Baby booms happens everywhere after the war ends to replace children lost dirrectly/indirectly to the conflict + young couples start families after putting off marriage during the war.

        My 2¢

        September 23, 2019 at EDT am

    • The main idea behind Duck and Cover was to teach kids that if they were indoors and saw the bright flash of a nuclear detonation, that they must take cover rather than follow normal instincts and rush to the windows to see what’s happening. Doing so is very dangerous because when the shock wave arrives the window can shatter with the glass blowing in.

      Peter

      ironrailsironweights

      September 22, 2019 at EDT am

  21. Good observation. I had considered this myself and wondered if some of the alarmist nonsense wasn’t concocted for that very reason — to drive legitimate concerns out of the public consciousness.

    It’s very obvious that very influential people pushing a doomsday scenario for which there is very little real evidence of danger. Meanwhile, one hears much less about much more serious concerns such as soil erosion, drug resistant diseases and plastic pollution. I could actually get on board movements to do something about those. But climate change? Hell no. Actually, it makes me angry that climate change is sucking the oxygen that could be used to do something about real problems. These climate change f*cks are a menace.

    destructure

    September 21, 2019 at EDT am

  22. It seems there must always be hysteria.

    The media has been spending the past two weeks going nuts over climate change. The Today Show has had a climate change segment EVERY SINGLE DAY, with the fat weatherman in some remote location explaining how it’s warmer there now than it was just last winter or some such…

    Vaping appears to be the new hysteria. The attention to such an insignificant issue seems mind boggling to me. Wal-Mart just announced they will no longer carry vaping products, yet they’ll still sell cigarettes. Figure that one out.

    Mike Street Station

    September 21, 2019 at EDT am

    • The new hysteria is that some parents are actually protesting Drag Queen Story Hour at the library! BIGOTS FULL OF HATE are being listened to, to the point that the library has to shorten it to a half hour!

      Drag King Raceway Park

      September 21, 2019 at EDT am

    • I’ve never gone to World Star Hiphop to see videos of black kids beating people up so they can be on WSH. But I still listen to the horrible radio station WINS occasionally, which almost every hour, it seems, will play the audio of a WSH-style video that shows a beatdown. I will hear the videographer and those close to his phone making insincere moans of … what … compassion? … as they witness the violence (e.g., “ohhhhhh!,” “nooooooo!”). These moans are part of every black street video that I’ve heard or seen. No one does anything to stop it, though. To get to the point of my comment on your hysteria comment, blacks and maybe other nonwhites don’t get hysterical about bad stuff, they just relish the drama.

      Radio Radio

      September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

    • “Vaping appears to be the new hysteria. The attention to such an insignificant issue seems mind boggling to me. Wal-Mart just announced they will no longer carry vaping products, yet they’ll still sell cigarettes. Figure that one out”

      Point of fact: I used to smoke cigarettes without much a problem. The most that I got was bronchitis on occasion, which may or may not have been from the cigarettes but which got me to quit them for good.

      I tried vaping a few years ago: it being sold as a ‘healthy'(ier) way to both be able to indulge in the smoking ritual and to get a nicotine fix. I bought a nicer vape pen and a variety of nicotine liquids from a couple of quality sources.

      Within one month, my lungs started making sounds that they never had before. When I would inhale, they would pop like popcorn. This was clearly from the vaping. I threw all of the vaping gear out and hoped that my lungs would return to normal. After about one year, they seemed to. Keep in mind this was only after one month of vaping at night.

      There is something to the vaping “alarmism” in my opinion. Also in my opinion, the real tragedy is that this smoking tech was allowed to be sold to the public for so long without long term testing first being done.

      Mike

      September 25, 2019 at EDT pm

  23. And how about Peak Oil? I think some people believed in it also 10-15 years ago.

    tmmm

    September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

    • I still believe in Peak Oil, but obviously people were wrong who predicted it was going to happen any day.

      In general, there will be all sorts of resource shortages in the future after we’ve depleted all of the most prolific mineral deposits and oil fields etc.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

    • It won’t peak suddenly. It will trail off slowly as prices increase. I (boomer) won’t see it my lifetime.

      Frau Katze

      September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

      • The peak just means the year when oil production reaches its highest ever, and then every year after that less oil is produced than the year before.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

      • @Lion It’s not that simple. New technology was able to get shale oil, previously thought impossible.

        There’s a lot of fossil fuel like that. The Canadian oil sands, for example. They can get some of it now.

        And there’s Colombia, where the citizens starve or leave while the oil sits there waiting for a political change.

        And there’s a lot of oil left in a field currently considered depleted. Maybe someone will figure out how to get it.

        I would say you’d see up and down, not a single peak.

        Frau Katze

        September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

  24. Totally off-topic but totally tragic: alt-right hero and clinical psychologist Jordan Peterson has checked into rehab for Xanax addiction. Not like I’m a huge fan of his but I was very surprised by this. Hope he gets better….

    GondwanaMan

    September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

    • There’s some schadenfreude there. He tells me people how to improve their psychological well being, but I never had to check into rehab for anything.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

      • I didn’t know about that. I heard his wife was ill, but no one knew any details.

        Frau Katze

        September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Why would there be schadenfreude? He’s been open with his struggle with depression and his wife’s cancer diagnosis probably started a downward spiral. Why would you be happy he’s having troubles?

        Mike Street Station

        September 22, 2019 at EDT am

      • Because he wrote a book about how to live your life better, but there he is addicted to drugs.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 22, 2019 at EDT am

      • There’s something about his demeanor that reminds me somewhat of the televangelists my grandparents used to watch growing up. Preachy, sometimes condescending, always self-righteous (and yes, I know he probably adopts that posture because of the retarded SJWs he goes up against).

        But I wouldn’t wish drug addiction on my worse enemy….

        GondwanaMan

        September 22, 2019 at EDT am

      • *when I was growing up…

        GondwanaMan

        September 22, 2019 at EDT am

      • “Because he wrote a book about how to live your life better, but there he is addicted to drugs.”

        With schadenfreude, you take satisfaction in another person’s misfortune because the other person is some sort of asshole. But how does writing a book to help people make Peterson an asshole? He is a humble, sincere person, and a lot of people have been helped by his book, He is not an asshole. He has been attacked by the left because he is politically incorrect in some ways. He thinks it is more important that the government should not force people to speak in a certain way, than it is to use certain pronouns for transgendered people.

        Rosenmops

        September 22, 2019 at EDT am

      • I guess that would matter if he had said, “stay away from drugs” in his book. I doubt it was covered.

        Mike Street Station

        September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

      • “Because he wrote a book about how to live your life better, but there he is addicted to drugs.”

        Lion, JP isn’t “addicted” to anything. His wife until recently had a terminal illness. And depression runs in his family (which he has said publicly.) His doctor prescribed him anti-depressants. He then tried to get off them but found he was having bad withdrawal symptoms – symptoms that could be fatal. He checked himself into rehab to get off the anti-depressant successfully and safely. You’re making it sound as if he was getting high to escape problems. And what’s with this gloating over someone else’s misfortune? There are times when our Lion is a bad Lion indeed!

        Maryk (the g-loaded guidette)

        September 24, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Maryk,

        That sounds like physical addiction with extra words.

        MoreSigmasThanYou

        September 25, 2019 at EDT pm

    • I could see it coming, he looked more and more agitated and unbalanced the more success he had, kind of a rock start syndrome. I think also being attacked so much was affecting him, at the end of the day we are talking here about some academic who accidentally was sucked into fame, not someone who always wanted to be on a stage. Still he had some good points and interesting lectures

      Hashed

      September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

      • An academic in psychology, who put a huge amount of effort into his lectures, and posted them online for years. He sought fame. I am not saying that is a bad thing, just pointing it out.

        Lowe

        September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

      • I don’t think it is fair to say Peterson sought fame just for putting lectures online. He may have done it for the convenience of his students. I have put lectures online and it was definitely not to seek fame!

        Rosenmops

        September 22, 2019 at EDT am

      • You’re wrong. Peterson is almost theatrical in his lectures Notice he went into a field where social skills are important. Notice how good looking he is, of which he is definitely conscious.

        He sought fame. Full stop, no matter what he says. He knew what he was doing, and he did it by design. I like the guy, and it seems you do too. I’m not knocking him. But his motivations are clear.

        Lowe

        September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Lowe wrote: “An academic in psychology, who put a huge amount of effort into his lectures, and posted them online for years. He sought fame. I am not saying that is a bad thing, just pointing it out.”

        —————————————————-

        I wouldn’t say he is theatrical. To me theatrical implies phony. Justin Trudeau is theatrical, Cory
        Booker is theatrical. I think Peterson is sometimes emotional in his lectures, but he seems absolutely sincere.

        Peterson seems emotional in this clip.

        Rosenmops

        September 23, 2019 at EDT am

    • Not xanax actually, but klonopin

      driveallnight

      September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Yeah, i just realized it was klonopin, not Xanax (which I’m personally a fan of, in moderation). Klonopin is a lot like Xanax, except like 50 times more powerful…

        GondwanaMan

        September 22, 2019 at EDT am

    • Oh no! That is very sad. I believe he had a problem with alcohol as a youth.

      Rosenmops

      September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

    • Peterson is NOT alt-right.

      Frau Katze

      September 22, 2019 at EDT am

      • He claims to be neither left nor right. But the majority of his followers are alt-right types.

        GondwanaMan

        September 22, 2019 at EDT am

      • so alt-right by proxy

        GondwanaMan

        September 22, 2019 at EDT am

      • What do you mean by “alt-right”? Anti-semitic? White nationalist? He’s not. Neither are most of his supporters? Calling someone alt-right is a serious charge.

        Frau Katze

        September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

      • You don’t have to say alt-right, you can just say GAY

        driveallnight

        September 23, 2019 at EDT am

      • @driveallnight WTF?

        Frau Katze

        September 24, 2019 at EDT am

      • Uh-oh, someone needs a safe space

        driveallnight

        September 24, 2019 at EDT pm

      • The often breathtaking autistic tilt of the lion’s commentariat is one of my fave things about this blog.

        driveallnight

        September 24, 2019 at EDT pm

      • “The often breathtaking autistic tilt of the lion’s commentariat is one of my fave things about this blog”.

        The frequent use of last resort, semantically void ad-hominems being my favorite thing about permanently marginalized cuckservatives.

        Mike

        September 25, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Go back to stormfront, wignat

        driveallnight

        September 25, 2019 at EDT pm

  25. I don’t worry about climate change or nuclear war or nuclear reactor accidents. What I do worry about is a Democrat president getting elected in 2020, with Democrats in charge of both houses of congress, and enactment into law of all the nutty things they’ve proposed. Even if the nominee is a relative moderate like Biden, he will forced to take a foaming-at-the-mouth whack job like Stacey Abrams as his running mate, and he will be taking orders from AOC plus 3, in effect.

    And let’s not even contemplate what happens if for some reason his health fails and he is unable to complete his term.

    Sgt. Joe Friday

    September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

    • Biden is senile, even if elected, he won’t be the one making the decisions.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

    • I worry about nuclear war, reactor accidents AND a Democrat getting elected in 2020, And I’m a Canadian. If the US goes open borders, it is going to become a 3rd world country, I also worry about Trudeau (aka Aladdin) winning another term on Oct. 21. (or which ever day the election is on). This nitwit is running the country into the ground.

      Rosenmops

      September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Yep, with both Biden and Trudeau, I can’t even bear to think about it.

        Frau Katze

        September 22, 2019 at EDT am

      • ” If the US goes open borders, it is going to become a 3rd world country”

        You Canucks better build that wall if you know what’s good for you. Let the sad demise of the United States be a warning.

        Mike Street Station

        September 22, 2019 at EDT am

  26. Older folks may also remember “nuclear winter” (popularized by Carl Sagan) which was a combination of nuclear war and climate change. And just like “climate change” today, the “nuclear winter” thesis was based on highly dubious computer models because the underlying purpose was to advance a political agenda not to do science.

    Lehuster

    September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

    • Yes, I had forgotten all about it till I read your post.

      Frau Katze

      September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

  27. I’m surprised nobody has mentioned “nuclear winter”. This was the theory that a nuclear exchange would put so much particulate matter into the stratosphere that the world would be plunged into an ice age. The big promoter was Carl Sagan. It allowed for doomsday scenarios, much like “runaway greenhouse” does today.

    Steverino@steverino.com

    September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

  28. With faster, deadlier ways to kill each other, and more and more nations becoming members of the nuclear club, how does it end. I find it kinda strange that we made it 74 years without eliminating each other.

    Tommy

    September 21, 2019 at EDT pm

    • MUTUALLY ASSURED DESTRUCTION.

      So far, more nukes have caused a stalemate that prevented the use of those nukes. They also prevented massive wars that could lead to the use of nukes.

      fakeemail

      September 22, 2019 at EDT am

      • We should have used a few more nukes before those other countries got them.

        destructure

        September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

    • I doubt many countries actually have nuclear weapons, despite whatever they say, or our lying, self-serving intelligence agencies say.

      People are almost always less competent than they would have you think. Especially when those people are not white men.

      Lowe

      September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

      • If China can make computer chips, they can make a technologically much simpler nuclear missile (which is 1950s technology).

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

      • China seems to have a problem with quality control. It’s not that they can’t make good quality things, it is that they are too cheap to do it. But maybe their nuclear weapons are better quality than their elevators.

        Rosenmops

        September 23, 2019 at EDT am

      • @Rosenmops I’m positive that China has functional nukes. But they won’t use them against the US because they know they’d get same in return.

        The bombs dropped over Japan did have one fortunate side effect: They showed the whole world how bad they were. Modern ones are even worse, and China knows it.

        Why do you think they’ve never been used since then?

        Frau Katze

        September 24, 2019 at EDT am

  29. Modern nuclear weapons are more like a tool of mass genocide than very physically destructive. They are detonated a mile or two in the air, raining down a mass of gamma rays onto every individual without exception. That’s their primary design and the casualty toll would be much higher than most would likely guess, with the physical destruction being much lower.

    Which may in-part answer the question as to why nuclear nations need so many of nuclear weapons. The answer might be to accomplish total civilian genocide in a given part of the world, should it come to that. This may be their primary purpose.

    This makes their future use a hard sell from a PR standpoint. There will be relatively little infrastructure destruction to photograph and to justify their practical wartime use above civilian genocide.

    That’s one more reason why, if nuclear bombs are detonated, its likely to be a last-resort, end-of-the-world scenario with no one to be accountable after. A very different situation than that of Japan.

    Mike

    September 25, 2019 at EDT pm

  30. MEH 0910

    September 27, 2019 at EDT am


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: