Nuclear War is Coming

Please remember that I have the right to be wrong in expressing my views, and given the nature of what I’m sharing, I sincerely hope to be very, very wrong.

I’ve been thinking a lot about the current state of things, and it feels like there’s some serious preparation going on behind the scenes, especially when it comes to the U.S. and its adversaries. The U.S. seems to be playing a dual game. On one hand, they’re pushing foreign companies to relocate manufacturing back to the U.S., and on the other, they’re keeping Russia occupied through the proxy war in Ukraine. I can’t help but wonder if the U.S. is preparing for an all-out war down the line, or if they already know it’s coming. Russia and China seem to be the main threats, and maybe the U.S. is trying to get ready now, before it really escalates. But even with Russia being distracted in Ukraine, it’s clear the U.S. knows they’re a tough opponent. Their industrial base is strong, and that’s something the West didn’t fully account for. Dealing with Russia directly is risky, and I think that’s why the U.S. is trying to make sure its economy is prepared for whatever comes next. Bringing manufacturing back to the U.S. makes sense, it ensures the country isn’t dependent on adversaries for key supplies when things heat up.

Historically, we’ve seen civilian factories quickly turned into military production hubs during wartime. During World War II, for example, the U.S. turned automobile factories into tank and airplane manufacturing plants. Companies like Ford and General Motors, which were originally focused on civilian cars, became essential to the war effort, producing military vehicles and aircraft. The transition was rapid and massive, as the entire industrial base was repurposed to meet the needs of the military. This shows how quickly civilian factories can be adapted to a wartime economy, and it’s something that’s still a key strategy today. The U.S. has the industrial capacity, but it needs to ensure it’s not dependent on foreign manufacturers, especially when the geopolitical stakes are this high.

It also makes me think about the growing possibility of nuclear war. It's not something anyone wants to think about, but with the way things are going, the West might actually be willing to engage in it if things escalate. The whole idea that nuclear war is unthinkable feels less true now. The language is changing, and there’s a growing acceptance of nuclear options, even tactical nukes. That’s the part that’s really unsettling, because if Russia and China were to align more closely, the West might eventually feel like nuclear conflict is the only way to maintain some kind of power and influence.

And then there’s Iran, which I think the U.S. sees as more manageable in the short term. They could probably deal with Iran militarily without it spiraling into a larger conflict, but the bigger concern is Russia and China. If those two countries become too strong, the U.S. might feel it has no choice but to consider escalating to a nuclear strategy. It’s a power game, and at some point, that could mean nuclear weapons.

The whole push to bring manufacturing back to the U.S. seems like part of a bigger plan to prepare for a future conflict, but it’s also about the present. The U.S. is positioning itself so that if they get locked into a war with Russia and China, they have the industrial capacity to sustain it. That’s the lesson from the proxy war in Ukraine. Russia has a strong industrial base that keeps its military running despite heavy sanctions. If the U.S. wants to compete, it needs to have that same kind of resilience.

But what really stands out to me is how nuclear war, which seemed unimaginable just a few decades ago, is now part of the conversation. It’s no longer just about deterrence. There’s a real possibility that the U.S. might be willing to use nuclear weapons if it means securing its position. It’s a terrifying thought, but I can’t help feeling like it's being considered more seriously now than ever before.

ArishMell · 70-79, M

Russia, Chian and North Korea have other weapons now, and are already using them in what so far might be just "tests" or "probes", by Internet-based subversion, interference and sabotage.

The Russians are already occasionally sabotaging property on land and under the sea. Bear in mind the greatest bulk of international telecommunications including the Internet is not by satellite but by fibre-optic cables overland and across the sea floor. Some countries also have undersea electrical power cables or oil and gas pipelines between each other, also potential targets.

The problem with conventional war for the aggressor is that he is taking a gamble and knows he will lose a huge number of people and vast amount of equipment. If a territorial ambition it also means taking over a physically ruined country. If he also If he uses nuclear weapons he also risks not only similar ones landing on his territory, but also the radioactive fall-out drifting down onto his own land.

If an all-out nuclear war ever broke out no-one would "win" but one side would come off less devastated than the other, and everyone including all those neutral and otherwise unaffected would suffer for decades to come.

So any major future war is more likely to something very different from the past.

Until the First World War, fighting was by armies and navies slugging it out. The fighting had relatively little effect on the non-combatants civilians other than conscription, looting by passing soldiers and damage to farm land. Air attacks on cities started in WW1 and WW2 saw the start of widespread damage to cities, culminating in the nuclear fission bombs dropped on Hisoshima and Nagasaki, and the partition of Europe.

The Cold War was a nuclear threat stand-off between "The West" and the USSR; with America apparently using Western Europe as both ally and sacrificial buffer. The Pentagon even placed nuclear warhead missiles in European countries with no intention to seek the host's permission to use them.

It was also the era in which the nuclear hydrogen-fusion bomb was developed; a weapon far more powerful than the uranium-fission weapon. The two fission bombs dropped on Japan in 1945 had "yields" <20kt TNT. The fusion bombs are in the Mega-tonnes range; the most powerful ever tested was a Russian experiment rated at 50Mt, though impracticable as a war weapon due to its physical size and weight. A US test in the Pacific of a 15Mt bomb claimed more Japanese victims by its fall-out drifting down onto the crew of a fishing-boat 100 miles down-wind.

Hence the Cold War stand-off based on the gruesome "Mutually Assured Destruction" premise; though planning also assumed invasion by the Soviet land, air and naval forces and a vast amount of "conventional" fighting.

Now though, we have a new and far more stealthy weapon; launched by pressing [Send] on a computer programme, even a social[??]-media site....... The attacker is hidden, he and everyone around him are physically safe, there is no damage to the physical assets the attacker wants to steal or subjugate.

Backed by the odd ship "accidentally" dragging its anchor across a cable or two, by selected assassinations, by mysterious arson attacks. Or by naked intimidation (as indeed the Chinese navy and air-force are using).