Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Nuclear War, Dieoffs, and Doomer Porn! Pt. 2

For discussions of events and conditions not necessarily related to Peak Oil.

Re: Probability of nuclear war

Unread postby evilgenius » Thu 14 Sep 2017, 11:13:24

I understand that nuclear forensics can answer the question of where any bomb came from. The trick is the resolve. Mutually assured destruction means that you have to destroy if you have been destroyed. There have been countless works of fiction written where the leaders of the countries involved decide to trade cities. Given the groundswell that elected Trump, I don't think that would work. Real people want revenge.
User avatar
evilgenius
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2339
Joined: Tue 06 Dec 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Stopped at the border.

Re: Probability of nuclear war

Unread postby Tanada » Fri 15 Sep 2017, 06:45:48

evilgenius wrote:I understand that nuclear forensics can answer the question of where any bomb came from. The trick is the resolve. Mutually assured destruction means that you have to destroy if you have been destroyed. There have been countless works of fiction written where the leaders of the countries involved decide to trade cities. Given the groundswell that elected Trump, I don't think that would work. Real people want revenge.


Detective work on bomb debris will only zero in on the contaminants in the special nuclear material. For example the USA/UK/France cataloged each batch of plutonium manufactured in their production reactors so that if stolen material is used for a bomb they can track the material right back to the reactor it came from including usually the date of manufacture. However this ability has some serious caveats. It assumes all of the material in the device was A) Plutonium from one batch, B) Plutonium from a western reactor with good record keeping, C) Everyone is doing their best for accuracy and doesn't make a mistake using the equipment. If the debris in question comes from D) a pure Uranium bomb and E) Plutonium that is from several different reactors mixed together or F) Plutonium that has never been cataloged then the detective work can only tell you what materials were used to make the weapon and how efficient it was in using those materials. You can not confirm a location of origin without excellent records and good detective work combined.

As for the last point, I agree, if a minor power attacks a major power it isn't MAD because the major power will still be largely intact once the minor power has ceased to exist as a functional state. MAD is only when both parties have major arsenals and can strike back usually more than once after an attack. If North Korea or Iran has more than a handful of weapons when they strike are they more likely to hold some in reserve like the USA/UK/France policy to preserve a second strike? Or use them all in the first round to try and do maximum damage?
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14702
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: Probability of nuclear war

Unread postby evilgenius » Fri 15 Sep 2017, 10:23:59

Don't forget that the great powers have already given away their forensics secrets, by using atmospheric testing. Unless they've been making new bombs to give away from new sources the genie is probably already out of the bottle. There could be source material that comes from somewhere else yet, but how likely is that when they didn't foresee this situation when they started testing? Those programs during the Cold War were all out development programs. It is unlikely they held much back. Given the cost, would Russia, for instance, develop new weapons from new sources specifically to spread them out amongst terrorists? Wouldn't it be too easy for them to get caught? Clever of the North Koreans to test theirs inside of a mountain. Maybe that's because it would reveal much more than the world suspects, since they are convinced a country whose citizens basically eat grass did this on their own, if the signature of those bomb's material was known, or some construction technique revealed itself? In that case there are many potential suspects, maybe even Pakistan, although they don't have a hydrogen bomb.

I think the probability of war goes up as long as the resolve of the US to counter attack is perceived as weak. Whoever is in charge, has to make a statement about policy that says that the US reserves the right to reply in kind, and overwhelmingly, to any attack upon it, or its allies, which they interpret as an attack by a weapon of mass destruction, including biological and nerve agents. They even have to say that, and direct it at, whichever country these little provocateurs are beholden to. Right now, everything appears muddled, like living in a cartoon. It's all about tough talk, and the apparent size of each leader's balls (the true legacy of GW's flightsuit, and breaking international law to invade Iraq over false WMD charges).

Obviously, this doesn't include the US army being destroyed by such things if they attempt to invade some other country. That's where the reasoning exists for these small countries to possess these weapons. In such cases, they do not have to match the industrial capacity of the great powers in order to make the number of weapons they need. They do still need to keep a handle on them, though.
User avatar
evilgenius
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2339
Joined: Tue 06 Dec 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Stopped at the border.

Saudi Arabia’s Ambitious Plans for Nuclear Energy

Unread postby AdamB » Wed 17 Jan 2018, 10:27:42

It’s not clear that the plans will work as expected in terms of the announced timeline of completing 16 reactors (17.6 Gwe) by 2032. The cost of the program is close to $90 billion which over a period of more than two decades for a feasible schedule would involve a significant diversion of oil revenue even at $100/BBL. The current price is about $60/bbl and has been in that range since January 2015. Key issues for success are adequate sustained financing, supply chain logistics and reliability, as well as cost control, for three separate sites, and managing the fleet of reactors once they are built. The demand for long lead time components for a new build of this size would raise the prices for them on a global scale. The Reuters wire service reports that Saudi Arabia plans in April or May 2018


Saudi Arabia’s Ambitious Plans for Nuclear Energy
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 4298
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: Saudi Arabia’s Ambitious Plans for Nuclear Energy

Unread postby Tanada » Wed 17 Jan 2018, 11:45:46

AdamB wrote:
It’s not clear that the plans will work as expected in terms of the announced timeline of completing 16 reactors (17.6 Gwe) by 2032. The cost of the program is close to $90 billion which over a period of more than two decades for a feasible schedule would involve a significant diversion of oil revenue even at $100/BBL. The current price is about $60/bbl and has been in that range since January 2015. Key issues for success are adequate sustained financing, supply chain logistics and reliability, as well as cost control, for three separate sites, and managing the fleet of reactors once they are built. The demand for long lead time components for a new build of this size would raise the prices for them on a global scale. The Reuters wire service reports that Saudi Arabia plans in April or May 2018


Saudi Arabia’s Ambitious Plans for Nuclear Energy


Right now KSA uses oil, and in the more modern facilities natural gas, to generate all of their electricity except for the paltry level of solar and wind they installed to make greenwashing happen. By converting their grid over to nuclear they will free up around a MM/bbl/d of crude for export or other use, which seems like a money maker to me.
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14702
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: Saudi Arabia’s Ambitious Plans for Nuclear Energy

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Wed 17 Jan 2018, 11:53:00

Tanada wrote:Right now KSA uses oil, and in the more modern facilities natural gas, to generate all of their electricity except for the paltry level of solar and wind they installed to make greenwashing happen. By converting their grid over to nuclear they will free up around a MM/bbl/d of crude for export or other use, which seems like a money maker to me.

Absolutely.

And as a side effect, if it provides them the fissionable materials to have nukes for defense from various ME countries, all the better for them (from their perspective, anyway).

In fact, it wouldn't surprise me at all if, behind the scenes, they already have or have access to (as Plant commented on) the nukes they need to defend themselves. After all, look how much economic interdependency they and the US have had. And will continue to have at least for quite a while (depending, perhaps on how things like oil fracking and transportation electrification play out, which are far from certain as to extent and timing in coming decades). So as a "friend" of the US, I could easily see them having tacit permission, and perhaps the military supplies/tech. to do this already.

It's not as if bad actors don't already have nukes, now is it?
Given the track record of the perma-doomer blogs, I wouldn't bet a fast crash doomer's money on their predictions.
User avatar
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 5263
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 20:26:42

Re: Saudi Arabia May Go Nuclear Because of Obama’s Iran Deal

Unread postby KaiserJeep » Wed 17 Jan 2018, 12:12:53

Well YES, they do. However, KSA is not on friendly terms with Israel, any more than is Iran. A nuclear war in the ME is looming, as Israel certainly has nukes already. Such a war - or even the threat of such a war - could well be the trigger event for the final oil panic, locking us into the downward spiral of more expensive and increasingly rare petroleum supplies.

Maybe all of us waited too long to jump from the oncoming train, and ran out of time.
KaiserJeep 2.0, Neural Subnode 0010 0000 0001 0110 - 1001 0011 0011, Tertiary Adjunct to Unimatrix 0000 0000 0001

Resistance is Futile, YOU will be Assimilated.

Warning: Messages timestamped before April 1, 2016, 06:00 PST were posted by the unmodified human KaiserJeep 1.0
KaiserJeep
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4974
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 16:16:32
Location: California's Silly Valley

Re: Saudi Arabia May Go Nuclear Because of Obama’s Iran Deal

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Wed 17 Jan 2018, 12:22:48

KaiserJeep wrote:Well YES, they do. However, KSA is not on friendly terms with Israel, any more than is Iran. A nuclear war in the ME is looming, as Israel certainly has nukes already. Such a war - or even the threat of such a war - could well be the trigger event for the final oil panic, locking us into the downward spiral of more expensive and increasingly rare petroleum supplies.

Maybe all of us waited too long to jump from the oncoming train, and ran out of time.

Well, the fact that the train exists and should be feared has been well known since at least 1962 (Cuban Missile Crisis.)

But exactly what are people supposed to do about it? Live in a doomstead? Write their favorite congress-critters? Vote for politicians who promise peace (NEITHER side in the US, given BOTH sides' support for the military industrial complex, despite what their rhetoric to voters might be)?

It's one thing to try to prepare oneself financially, so an event like 2008-2009 stings instead of mangles one's finances. By the way, such preparation helps in terms of if, say, gasoline gets to $10 or even $20 a gallon, forcing society to change instead of just talk about it.

But preventing nuclear war? When the US "intelligence" networks don't even know where all the nukes are? I think that's outside the pay grade of 99.9999% of ordinary human beings.

I'm NOT disagreeing with the concern or being snippy -- I just honestly don't know how a normal person is supposed to (realistically) meaningfully do anything about it.
Given the track record of the perma-doomer blogs, I wouldn't bet a fast crash doomer's money on their predictions.
User avatar
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 5263
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 20:26:42

Nuclear War, Dieoffs, and Doomer Porn! Pt. 2

Unread postby KaiserJeep » Wed 17 Jan 2018, 12:36:57

OS, I never said there was anything that could be done about the situation, by any one of us or the Donald for that matter. The conflict in the ME is at least 3000 years old.

What you can do is hang on for the ride, and hope to be both not in a target zone and not downwind from one.

I was in my early teens when they warned us not to eat the snow which was contaminated with Strontium 90 from above-ground nuclear weapons testing. That was with the Cuban Missile Crisis fresh in our minds.

The only thing I have ever found to do that actually helps the stress is to watch a macabre yet insanely funny film:
Image
KaiserJeep 2.0, Neural Subnode 0010 0000 0001 0110 - 1001 0011 0011, Tertiary Adjunct to Unimatrix 0000 0000 0001

Resistance is Futile, YOU will be Assimilated.

Warning: Messages timestamped before April 1, 2016, 06:00 PST were posted by the unmodified human KaiserJeep 1.0
KaiserJeep
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4974
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 16:16:32
Location: California's Silly Valley

Re: 'Doomsday Clock' to stand still amid nuclear tensions

Unread postby Keith_McClary » Thu 01 Feb 2018, 12:08:23

Trump is leading us into nuclear war, says Daniel Ellsberg (and he should know, he used to plan them) (1 hour CBC radio interview)
A "Doomsday Machine" has loomed over humanity for decades, according to the man who once helped U.S. presidents plan for nuclear war.

In his new book, The Doomsday Machine: Confessions of a Nuclear War Planner, Daniel Ellsberg details how a nuclear strike during the Cold War would have clouded the earth's atmosphere and killed hundreds of millions.

Far more people still have access to launch codes than the public realize, he said, and it is only through luck that we avoided nuclear winter.

Not only does that threat still exist, but for the first time since the Cuban missile crisis, "an American president is threatening imminent attack on a nuclear-weapons state," he said. "On a state that can retaliate with nuclear weapons."

"I think there's a very significant chance — I would say better than even — that this president does mean to launch some kind of an attack on North Korea," he said, "that will lead to a response that will then cause a two-sided nuclear war."

"It would kill millions of people in the first day or week, which would be more violence than the human species has ever seen in a day or week."

"I think nothing at this moment is of higher importance than there not be a war with North Korea."
Facebook knows you're a dog.
User avatar
Keith_McClary
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7282
Joined: Wed 21 Jul 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Suburban tar sands

The Widening Saudi–Iran Divide

Unread postby AdamB » Sun 11 Feb 2018, 20:13:59

The conflict between Saudi Arabia and Iran marks a deepening division between regional powers and international hegemons in the Persian Gulf. The Saudis and Iranians have to learn to cooperate or risk further confrontation. By Seyed Hossein Mousavian New regional and international coalitions are forming with respect to the Middle East and Persian Gulf. An alliance of Donald Trump-led America, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates faces a new coalition of Iran, Russia, Iraq, Bashar Al-Assad controlled-Syria, Hezbollah and grassroots regional forces such as the Popular Mobilization Forces in Iraq and the Syrian Defense Forces. The geopolitical competition between these opposing sides can more specifically be described as between the regional states seeking U.S. security guarantees and the creation and consolidation of a U.S.-led regional security order, and those states—such as Iran, Russia, and Syria—who despite their interests not wholly


The Widening Saudi–Iran Divide
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 4298
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: Nuclear War, Dieoffs, and Doomer Porn! Pt. 2

Unread postby Tanada » Tue 06 Mar 2018, 14:03:28

Here is a nice cheerful article for your Tuesday! Link below quote.

Vladimir Putin Is Campaigning on the Threat of Nuclear War

Vladimir Putin belongs to that category of world leaders who lie all the time. His lies may not be as flamboyant as those of his American counterpart, but they can be just as outlandish. In his state-of-the-federation speech, on Thursday, Putin told some howlers about demographics, the social safety net, and Russian military might. He got a lot of applause, especially when he declared that the world would have to listen to Russia, now that the nation had armed itself to the teeth.

As with all Russian political rituals, this speech wasn’t what its name implied, or what it might have seemed. The country’s constitution requires the President to report back to parliament on an annual basis, but last year Putin skipped the address altogether. This year’s speech was not so much a report—after all, the parliament reports to Putin, not the other way around—as a stump speech. On March 18th, Russia will hold an event that it calls an election, which it isn’t, considering that its execution is tightly controlled, and its outcome is preordained. But, still, an “election” day has a way of focussing Russian politics, or what passes for politics, in response to the perceived threat to Putin’s continued power.

Where might such a threat come from? Obviously not from Russian voters; their actual votes are separated from the outcome of the so-called election by layers of bureaucrats, who insure that the vote outcome matches the perceived expectations of their higher-ups. Nor does the threat come from Russian opposition activists, most of whom have been killed, jailed, or forced into exile. The threat, judging from Putin’s speech, comes from the United States.

For the first hour and ten minutes of his speech, Putin seemed bored by the entire exercise: he droned on, looking down at the prepared text, frequently doubling back to correct a word he’d misread. But, when he got to the security section of the talk, Putin became animated—to the extent that he is capable of becoming animated. In the next forty-seven minutes, as he extolled the successes of the Russian arms industry, Putin looked up at the audience frequently, added words for emphasis, showed video clip after video clip, and often paused for applause. This was the heart of his speech.

The narrative he offered has long been familiar. In this story, Russia was badly wounded by losing its Soviet colonies; was further slighted by the West, which refused to take it seriously; and is now staging a comeback as a superpower. Some of the details were new: Putin claimed that Russia had developed and tested several kinds of weapons, including nuclear ones, that the rest of the world still sees only in its wildest dreams. To illustrate the point, Putin showed a computer animation of missiles hitting the coast of Florida. (This video, as some Russian journalists quickly noticed, was itself not new; it was first shown on Russian state television in 2007.) Putin noted that he couldn’t show pictures of the actual missiles, presumably because they are top-secret. Military experts on both sides of the Atlantic have suggested that another reason they couldn’t be shown is that they do not exist.

Whether the weapons exist, though, is entirely beside the point. A fake state-of-the-federation report, on the eve of a fake election, filled with false statements on a variety of topics, does not even pretend to describe reality; rather, it provides a direct look at the speaker’s imagination. In Putin’s view of the world, Russia is facing an existential threat, and this threat emanates from the United States. Putin believes that the threat has grown in recent months. While Americans debate whether—and to what extent—their President is the Russian President’s puppet, Putin sees Trump as an aggressive and unpredictable adversary. In the year since Trump became President, the United States has increased the number of Russians who are under sanctions; functional diplomatic relations between the two countries have been stripped to a minimum; and America’s nuclear posture has grown distinctly more aggressive. Putin cited President Trump’s national-security strategy, which he sees as setting a lower bar for a first nuclear strike than does the Russian military doctrine. (This point is debatable.) Putin stressed—as he has before, but with even greater force, and at greater length—that Russia will not hesitate to defend itself with nuclear weapons.

The Russian President, in other words, is campaigning on the promise of nuclear annihilation. Whether or not the new weapons he described in this stump speech are real is immaterial; the old ones are more than sufficient to cause a nuclear holocaust.


LINK
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14702
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: Nuclear War, Dieoffs, and Doomer Porn! Pt. 2

Unread postby M_B_S » Sun 22 Apr 2018, 21:03:46

There are rumors in the www net planet x will hit earth today
M_B_S
User avatar
M_B_S
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3501
Joined: Sat 20 Aug 2005, 02:00:00

Re: Nuclear War, Dieoffs, and Doomer Porn! Pt. 2

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Sun 22 Apr 2018, 21:24:32

The Newyorker wrote:Vladimir Putin belongs to that category of world leaders who lie all the time.

You mean to tell me that the Russian hookers aren't the most beautiful in the world? Hope I can get a refund on my plane tickets. :oops:
I thought as he owns a controlling interest and gets a cut from every (shall we say entertainment establishment) in Russia he would know the quality of his merchandise and was just marketing his product to Trump back when Trump took the Miss Universe show to Moscow.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 8859
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: Nuclear War, Dieoffs, and Doomer Porn! Pt. 2

Unread postby KaiserJeep » Tue 24 Apr 2018, 18:32:40

vt, you get both the cynic-of-the-month award and a special endorsement for sarcasm. But then perhaps comparing the personalities of both national leaders to pimps is to insult actual pimps.
KaiserJeep 2.0, Neural Subnode 0010 0000 0001 0110 - 1001 0011 0011, Tertiary Adjunct to Unimatrix 0000 0000 0001

Resistance is Futile, YOU will be Assimilated.

Warning: Messages timestamped before April 1, 2016, 06:00 PST were posted by the unmodified human KaiserJeep 1.0
KaiserJeep
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4974
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 16:16:32
Location: California's Silly Valley

Re: Nuclear War, Dieoffs, and Doomer Porn! Pt. 2

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Tue 24 Apr 2018, 18:51:21

KaiserJeep wrote:vt, you get both the cynic-of-the-month award and a special endorsement for sarcasm. But then perhaps comparing the personalities of both national leaders to pimps is to insult actual pimps.
Why thank you and all the members of the Peak oil Academy for this totally deserved award. Now that I have a "Golden pump jack" I will have to put in a fireplace and mantle to have a place to display it.
Unfortunately no insult to pimps short of two in the head is sufficient to rectify their crimes to the young people they have enslaved. And Putin is a pimp of pimps in that like a mob boss he may not know any of the girls and boys by name but he still gets a cut from every trick they are forced to turn.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 8859
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: Nuclear War, Dieoffs, and Doomer Porn! Pt. 2

Unread postby asg70 » Tue 24 Apr 2018, 20:59:54

M_B_S wrote:There are rumors in the www net planet x will hit earth today
M_B_S


Well, that one came and went without much fuss. What else is new?
“If and when the oil price skewers for 6 months or more substantially above the MAP, then I will concede the Etp is inherently flawed"
--Onlooker, 1/1/2018
asg70
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1787
Joined: Sun 05 Feb 2017, 13:17:28

Re: Nuclear War, Dieoffs, and Doomer Porn! Pt. 2

Unread postby M_B_S » Wed 25 Apr 2018, 01:33:34

asg70 wrote:
M_B_S wrote:There are rumors in the www net planet x will hit earth today
M_B_S


Well, that one came and went without much fuss. What else is new?


You and I are still alife and are getting older ... lol :-D :idea:

M_B_S
User avatar
M_B_S
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3501
Joined: Sat 20 Aug 2005, 02:00:00

Previous

Return to Geopolitics & Global Economics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests