This video is really disappointing. The voice over artists, music, and 80s graphics all make this look like propaganda, not remotely educational or enlightening. Next time give us some facts - perhaps statistics on the weapons that already exist, how much they cost, or even how many times over they could destroy the earth. That would be so much more effective than a long-winded recitation of policy points and theories (and I do agree with most of them - just not the delivery).
Our nuclear capability has indeed deterred other countries from attacking us. If not, why did the Soviets back down in the Cuban missile crisis? But the deterrence of our nuclear force only works against rational state actors, probably not terrorists. If deterrence is a myth, why have we not had a world war since the dawn of nuclear weapons? Do you really want to open the door to World War III by eliminating the threat of nuclear annihilation among major powers? The genie is out.
Many nations would not ratify an international treaty. Doing so only means taking nuclear weapons out of the hands of the nations that are willing to be held accountable and help the international community, and not take them away from the dishonest, militant loose cannons. In a fight, having the best weapons always is better then voluntarily accepting worse ones.
1. This is based of of human nature. The proof is in the fact that nations are not self destructive.
2. MAD is not supposed to defend against terrorists, it is supposed to defend from large scale war, like the one averted between the US and the Soviet Union.
3. Proliferation to secure, long established powerhouses is a good idea. Proliferation to small, militant takeover states is not.
4. Just because MAD has a high success record doesn't mean that we won't create fallbacks (missile defense).
And what was the reason the US didn't invade Cuba? Oh ya, we were afraid of a Nuclear retaliation. Wait doesn't that support the other side of this issue? Also we know with certainty that Treaties cannot prevent an attack by terrorist that cannot be located or are suicidal. Treaties are simply ineffective against such extremist. All leaders not being rational all the time is why we don't want the proliferation to other countries. I could go on but I'm starting to feel I'm being punked.
And for the fact that you can´t have deterrence with terrorist groups; if a terrorist group explodes a nuclear bomb in new york, where US will respond? Al Qaeda is not country
They say nuclear deterrence is irrational, but their way of structuring argument itself lacks logic. it'll serve only as one more page in the long history of peace fantasy. I can definitely assure that Nuclear Age Peace Foundation will NEVER change any status quo of nuclear power balance.
@modestwind I totally agree with you. It was because of nuclear weapons that the world didn´t have to experience WW3. My critic is that deterrence works perfectly only between few countries; the moment many countries have nuclear weapons deterrence will become fragile.
With the billions of dollars that are given to the research of space and the universe, it appears that the occupants of planet earth are the only known living organisms for as far as they are able to see. Nuclear war is not just a human focussed annihilation, it's an annihilation of all living things and a permanent and disastrous genetic retardation of any life form that may be unlucky enough to survive a holocaust. I hope the men that control this world can see that and I hope for the future x
@igmuska My dear, you are incorrect. "People do not "hate" each other. The Governments of the world have MANIPULATED, and are MANIPULATING, world affairs. And in-so-doing, have turned brother against brother, sister against sister, mother against Father, and so on. The "reason" people "hate each other," is because they have been TRICKED into believing we are "different.". When the governments of the world, are changed, and ONLY when, THEN we will ALL "love one another, as I have loved you" Jesus
@hddragracer1 Exactly! Now question how you are being manipulated into trying to correct me. Changing the world governments? Changing them into what? Their current activities indicate the current governments are bent on nuclear combat. But I am not worried.
As you related religious dogma, I must relate what we believe, this way of life ends in fire and the buffalo and the Lakota will return . This happened before and this is the last time it happens. It is over
They shouldn't have put Obama -- that overrated pretty boy is commander-in-chief and yet what EXACTLY has he done ..?
"Obama will not fulfill that potential for change unless he is enveloped by a social movement, which is angry enough, powerful enough, insistent enough, that he fills his abstract phrases about change with some real content."
A great video! It's crazy that the world ignores the threat posed by nuclear weapons. Scientific American magazine (Sept 2010, page 83) gives the odds of a nuclear war as roughly 1-in-30 over the next 10 years. That's roughly 1-in-4 when extended to the 80 year life of a child born today! My thanks go to Nuclear Age Peace Foundation for making this engaging, informative video. Martin Hellman
@GliderGuy50 Damn only 800 views and 1 constructive comment wheras a video promoting it gets 1M hits with comments such as but not limited to: Burn mother****ers, die islam and dont mess with us... I give it 1 in 2 at the very least...
One slip, and the whole world goes to hell, the world has survived world wars, would it survive a nuclear war? I dont think so.
Alecal892 2 months ago
This video is really disappointing. The voice over artists, music, and 80s graphics all make this look like propaganda, not remotely educational or enlightening. Next time give us some facts - perhaps statistics on the weapons that already exist, how much they cost, or even how many times over they could destroy the earth. That would be so much more effective than a long-winded recitation of policy points and theories (and I do agree with most of them - just not the delivery).
glass0eye 4 months ago
Many countries and organizations need to start building nuclear weapons if they want to survive and/or prevent imperialism.
WarmongerWW3 5 months ago
I believe in Nuclear Deterrence and I'm sick of this hippie crap that says otherwise, they have no concept of the real world.
MrPaddyjmay 7 months ago
@MrPaddyjmay So Henry Kissinger is a hippie, along with many other military and political leaders past and present?
NuclearAgePeace 7 months ago
at 1:01 there is a frowny face :p
nightkids805 10 months ago
@nightkids805 HAHAHAHAHA
NMWMN 6 months ago
Our nuclear capability has indeed deterred other countries from attacking us. If not, why did the Soviets back down in the Cuban missile crisis? But the deterrence of our nuclear force only works against rational state actors, probably not terrorists. If deterrence is a myth, why have we not had a world war since the dawn of nuclear weapons? Do you really want to open the door to World War III by eliminating the threat of nuclear annihilation among major powers? The genie is out.
srichason 1 year ago
Many nations would not ratify an international treaty. Doing so only means taking nuclear weapons out of the hands of the nations that are willing to be held accountable and help the international community, and not take them away from the dishonest, militant loose cannons. In a fight, having the best weapons always is better then voluntarily accepting worse ones.
thegreatapologist 1 year ago
1. This is based of of human nature. The proof is in the fact that nations are not self destructive.
2. MAD is not supposed to defend against terrorists, it is supposed to defend from large scale war, like the one averted between the US and the Soviet Union.
3. Proliferation to secure, long established powerhouses is a good idea. Proliferation to small, militant takeover states is not.
4. Just because MAD has a high success record doesn't mean that we won't create fallbacks (missile defense).
thegreatapologist 1 year ago
And what was the reason the US didn't invade Cuba? Oh ya, we were afraid of a Nuclear retaliation. Wait doesn't that support the other side of this issue? Also we know with certainty that Treaties cannot prevent an attack by terrorist that cannot be located or are suicidal. Treaties are simply ineffective against such extremist. All leaders not being rational all the time is why we don't want the proliferation to other countries. I could go on but I'm starting to feel I'm being punked.
RackemUp707 1 year ago
wait this is a video by The Onion right?
RackemUp707 1 year ago
And for the fact that you can´t have deterrence with terrorist groups; if a terrorist group explodes a nuclear bomb in new york, where US will respond? Al Qaeda is not country
fefe74e 1 year ago
Comment removed
fefe74e 1 year ago
They say nuclear deterrence is irrational, but their way of structuring argument itself lacks logic. it'll serve only as one more page in the long history of peace fantasy. I can definitely assure that Nuclear Age Peace Foundation will NEVER change any status quo of nuclear power balance.
modestwind 1 year ago
@modestwind I totally agree with you. It was because of nuclear weapons that the world didn´t have to experience WW3. My critic is that deterrence works perfectly only between few countries; the moment many countries have nuclear weapons deterrence will become fragile.
fefe74e 1 year ago
amirica will always hiddin nukes
4185562 1 year ago
Nice work, very informative.
MrDarkstalker15 1 year ago
Survival!!! hurray!!! xD
zergheit 1 year ago 2
With the billions of dollars that are given to the research of space and the universe, it appears that the occupants of planet earth are the only known living organisms for as far as they are able to see. Nuclear war is not just a human focussed annihilation, it's an annihilation of all living things and a permanent and disastrous genetic retardation of any life form that may be unlucky enough to survive a holocaust. I hope the men that control this world can see that and I hope for the future x
NMWMN 1 year ago
nuclear combat is inevitable...why? because people hate each other, .learning to love one another is impossible. Too bad Stuxnet changes all that
igmuska 1 year ago
@igmuska My dear, you are incorrect. "People do not "hate" each other. The Governments of the world have MANIPULATED, and are MANIPULATING, world affairs. And in-so-doing, have turned brother against brother, sister against sister, mother against Father, and so on. The "reason" people "hate each other," is because they have been TRICKED into believing we are "different.". When the governments of the world, are changed, and ONLY when, THEN we will ALL "love one another, as I have loved you" Jesus
hddragracer1 1 year ago
@hddragracer1 Exactly! Now question how you are being manipulated into trying to correct me. Changing the world governments? Changing them into what? Their current activities indicate the current governments are bent on nuclear combat. But I am not worried.
As you related religious dogma, I must relate what we believe, this way of life ends in fire and the buffalo and the Lakota will return . This happened before and this is the last time it happens. It is over
igmuska 1 year ago
Excellent video!! I can't believe it's only got a little over one thousand hits. Share it on Facebook and with everyone!
blevideo 1 year ago
They shouldn't have put Obama -- that overrated pretty boy is commander-in-chief and yet what EXACTLY has he done ..?
"Obama will not fulfill that potential for change unless he is enveloped by a social movement, which is angry enough, powerful enough, insistent enough, that he fills his abstract phrases about change with some real content."
--Professor Howard Zinn (1922 - 2010)
TheGreenVoter 1 year ago
A great video! It's crazy that the world ignores the threat posed by nuclear weapons. Scientific American magazine (Sept 2010, page 83) gives the odds of a nuclear war as roughly 1-in-30 over the next 10 years. That's roughly 1-in-4 when extended to the 80 year life of a child born today! My thanks go to Nuclear Age Peace Foundation for making this engaging, informative video. Martin Hellman
GliderGuy50 1 year ago
@GliderGuy50 Damn only 800 views and 1 constructive comment wheras a video promoting it gets 1M hits with comments such as but not limited to: Burn mother****ers, die islam and dont mess with us... I give it 1 in 2 at the very least...
felix123321123 1 year ago