74 years without global wars

[Quentin111]

On July 16, 1945, the world's first atomic bomb test, called Trinity (Trinity), was carried out in New Mexico.
Thanks to the work of Oppenheimer and Kurchatov, the creation of nuclear weapons of mass destruction, the whole world has been living for 74 years without world wars. The very possibility of guaranteed mutual destruction makes senseless the idea of victory in a world war.
True, during this past time there was a danger of using nuclear weapons:
1. Caribbean crisis of 1962.
2. False alarms of the Soviet missile attack warning system on September 26, 1983.

 

[fncceo]

Japan was the most fanatical enemy America has ever faced. The Japanese empire launched more than 5,000 suicide attacks on allied forces. An invasion of the Japanese home islands could have cost millions of lives.

The application of two, very small, nuclear devices turned the fanatical, war-mongering, Japanese empire into pacifist capitalists.

I'm not saying nuclear weapons are a boon to mankind, but the only time they were every used, they yielded fairly positive results.

 

[Quentin111]

In general, the presence of nuclear weapons and the sober mind of US and Soviet politicians prevented the start of a third world war.

 

[Polishprince]

How about the Global War on Evil which the Islamonazis declared by fatwa on America in 1996 and ratified by the World Islamic Front?

Osama B. Ladin started off as a jet setting playboy back in the day, but turned to Evil.

What happened was he was dating a blonde American chick with a large chest. She dumped his sorry ass because he really didn't measure up in the "hands" department if you get my drift.

When she confronted him, he was so enraged , he swore revenge upon America and embraced pure Evil as his ideology

 

[whitehall]

Funny how the intro fails to illustrate the only nuclear attacks (thank God) in history were authorized by a prresidet who was selected rather than elected and woke up one morning in April 1945 to find himself president. How can you justify incinerating two Japanese cities much less one when history tells us that Japan was desperate to surrender but little Harry refused to negotiate.

 

[Lincoln1976]

Funny how the intro fails to illustrate the only nuclear attacks (thank God) in history were authorized by a prresidet who was selected rather than elected and woke up one morning in April 1945 to find himself president. How can you justify incinerating two Japanese cities much less one when history tells us that Japan was desperate to surrender but little Harry refused to negotiate.

I held that belief as well and for a long time,but it turns out that it's not true.Japan was NOT trying to negotiate peace at all,quite the opposite was the case: for instance,Japanese tanks and I am talking here the most sophisticated/modern ones,were held back in defence of the home islands.Have you ever seen a type3 Chi-Nu? produced from September 44 on,it was eqipped with a high velocity 75mm gun and armoured well enouogh to take on a Sherman no problem,but all units produced were witheld for the home defence.The type 4 Chi-To was equivalent to the German Panther (I shit you not!) yet,the same story.
I could give you plenty of examples of other preparations,yet the tanks are (in my opinion) the most obvious one....the Japanese were willing to let their troops be steam rollered (literally) by US tanks in order to safe up enough of their capable new ones to defend the home islands

 

[harmonica]

On July 16, 1945, the world's first atomic bomb test, called Trinity (Trinity), was carried out in New Mexico.
Thanks to the work of Oppenheimer and Kurchatov, the creation of nuclear weapons of mass destruction, the whole world has been living for 74 years without world wars. The very possibility of guaranteed mutual destruction makes senseless the idea of victory in a world war.
True, during this past time there was a danger of using nuclear weapons:
1. Caribbean crisis of 1962.
2. False alarms of the Soviet missile attack warning system on September 26, 1983.

there has been wars all the time since 1945
the US has been in at least 3 wars since then

nukes don't stop wars
Pakistan and India have nukes--but they had wars and still having problems
Israel had nukes but they had many wars after they acquired them--didn't stop them from being attacked--and invaded

...the US had nukes and we were beaten by the North Vietnamese and attacked by the Chinese, who did not have nukes,!!!--- and gave us an a$$ whipping--SO--get it???!! nukes did not stop China at all..and did not stop or make the NKs stop/surrender
= it proves nukes don't stop countries from starting wars/etc

PG1 involved 7 countries
Korean War involved many countries
Vietnam with Cambodia and Laos military actions
....so 50,000 American dead---- plus a couple of MILLION civilians/NViets dead,--- is something to be thankful for?

 

[Toronado3800]

Funny how the intro fails to illustrate the only nuclear attacks (thank God) in history were authorized by a prresidet who was selected rather than elected and woke up one morning in April 1945 to find himself president. How can you justify incinerating two Japanese cities much less one when history tells us that Japan was desperate to surrender but little Harry refused to negotiate.

To Picaro who rated this funny,

I'm not going to damn Truman for deciding to drop the bombs but I find it an interesting debate. Heck, I did a paper in college on how an intercultural communication problem led to the Japanese getting themselves nuked. Something I haven't totally moved on from.

 

[harmonica]

most wars are not total/global
just because they are not ''global'' doesn't mean they are ''''better'''

Korean War had at least 10 UN countries vs NK, China, and Russia with 5 MILLION dead

 

[Toronado3800]

On July 16, 1945, the world's first atomic bomb test, called Trinity (Trinity), was carried out in New Mexico.
Thanks to the work of Oppenheimer and Kurchatov, the creation of nuclear weapons of mass destruction, the whole world has been living for 74 years without world wars. The very possibility of guaranteed mutual destruction makes senseless the idea of victory in a world war.
True, during this past time there was a danger of using nuclear weapons:
1. Caribbean crisis of 1962.
2. False alarms of the Soviet missile attack warning system on September 26, 1983.

there has been wars all the time since 1945
the US has been in at least 3 wars since then

nukes don't stop wars
Pakistan and India have nukes--but they had wars and still having problems
Israel had nukes but they had many wars after they acquired them--didn't stop them from being attacked--and invaded
...the US had nukes and we were beaten by the North Vietnamese and attacked by the Chinese who gave us an a$$ whipping

PG1 involved 7 countries
Korean War involved many countries
Vietnam with Cambodia and Laos military actions
....so 50,000 American dead---- plus a couple of MILLION civilians/NViets dead,--- is something to be thankful for?

We haven't had something like WWI or WWII is the point.

Lucky?

I dunno.

In some ways I'm worried the greatest generation is dying and the firsthand knowledge or relatability of them tragedies are going to fade a bit.

 

[justinacolmena]

Japan was the most fanatical enemy America has ever faced. The Japanese empire launched more than 5,000 suicide attacks on allied forces.

The Japanese imperialist state-corporate fascist industrialist-capitalist class was the enemy.

It does not follow that the kamikazes were "loyal" to the imperialists as much as the punishment they faced at home was much, much worse than a quick and sure death by suicide.

It does follow more logically that the common people of Japan never raised much objection to the imperialists' deposition from power, despite the seemingly unfair treatment of Japanese-Americans at the time.

 

[Lincoln1976]

most wars are not total/global
just because they are not ''global'' doesn't mean they are ''''better'''

Korean War had at least 10 UN countries vs NK, China, and Russia with 5 MILLION dead

The battle of Verdun,fought in 1916,cost The French and German army 980 000 casualties and that during a 9 month period...one single battle at a time,when Germany had a population of only 60 million and France 40 million,the "Kaiserschlacht" in the spring of 1918 cost 1.5 million casualties,hundred days offensive: 1.8 million and so on and on...sure,5 million is a lot,even though most was caused by China,sending in waves of waves of unprepared,ill equipped and untrained soldiers as literal cannon fodder and that makes the whole point...well,pointless...wars aren't equally importand or measured and the Korean war was more an example how socialism has a high capability of getting people killed