The Cold War has long cool off , but now Earth finds itself in a yet another earned run average of escalating tenseness and men sitting in front of red buttons .
In light of this , novel enquiry published in the journalSafetytook a pragmatic look at the optimum issue of nuclear warheads a nation should have in their armoury . Attempting to find the tipping detail , by their calculations , that number is 100 . This amount check all the political benefits of having atomic weapons , however , any more than this and it could prove ruinous , even for the land that lead up an attack .
In poor , if any nation has over 100 nukes , they should be prepared for their aggression to do back and kick them in the ass .
" With 100 nuclear artillery , you still get atomic deterrence , but avoid the likely backfire from nuclear fall that kills your own people , " Joshua Pearce , a professor at Michigan Technological University , say ina statement .
" defensive structure expending post-9/11 show we care about protect Americans . [ However ] , if we use 1,000 atomic warheads against an foe and no one retaliates , we will see about 50 times more Americans die than did on 9/11 due to the after - effect of our own weapon . "
Given the current number ofnuclear - build up land , if this proposal was followed the total number of nuclear warhead in the world would drop to 900 or fewer . Although , it bet like we ’re a very farsighted elbow room off that .
For context , there are around15,000 nuclear weaponsin the human race . intimately 14,000 are in the ownership of the US and Russia alone . The remain few are split between the seven other atomic nation : the UK ( 215 payload ) , France ( 300 ) , China ( 270 ) , India ( 120 ) , Pakistan ( 120 ) , Israel ( 80 ) , and North Korea ( < 10 ) .
So , why " just " 100 nuclear missiles ?
They argue that deploy over this act nuclear weapon would trigger a mountain chain of events result in catastrophe for the populace , even to the country that fired the missiles . A scenario in which a country uses over 100 nuke would easily result in a nuclear autumn and likely leave in a nuclear winter , where the worldwide temperature would drop because of soot from nuclear flack blocking the sun from reaching Earth ’s control surface .
It would also increase ultraviolet radiation to serious levels and make far less rain . This would go on to obliterate agrarian production and food shortages would quickly take detention .
" I do n’t cerebrate rationing would go overly smoothly – a lot more people would die in violence internally than what we estimated found on lack of calories , " added Pearce .
thing only get worse from here on in . solid food shortages are a sure fire means to promote violence , national revolt , and outside wars .
The US Castle Bravo Test – the most powerful machine ever detonated – on Bikini Atoll , March 1 , 1954
All in all , the research highlights the insanity of nuclear war . Along with argue for massive arsenal step-down , the researcher on the project also push for other policy recommendations in the Hope of warding off this forbidding fate .
" It is not noetic to pass billions of dollars maintaining a atomic armory that would destabilise your rural area if they were ever used , " Pearce says .
" Other commonwealth are far forged off . Even if they fired off relatively few nuclear weapons and were not strike by any of them and did not have retaliation , North Korea or Israel would be committing national suicide . "
And in case you were wondering , of course , there is n’t in reality a nuclear crimson button . This iswhat it would really face like .
