File:Nuclear war - small nukes are a misnomer - Potsdam.png: Difference between revisions
Siterunner (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Siterunner (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 58: | Line 58: | ||
[[File:StratDem Proposed Russia-Ukraine Fix.png|link=https://strategicdemands.com/a-proposed-ukraine-fix-act-now-to-expand-the-inf-agreement/]] | [[File:StratDem Proposed Russia-Ukraine Fix.png|link=https://strategicdemands.com/a-proposed-ukraine-fix-act-now-to-expand-the-inf-agreement/]] | ||
| |||
:[[File:Blue green lines 1.png]] | |||
| | ||
Line 72: | Line 76: | ||
[[File:Russia-US intermediate range nuclear forces treaty-INF in danger.png]] | [[File:Russia-US intermediate range nuclear forces treaty-INF in danger.png]] | ||
<small>https://www.nti.org/search/?f-search=inf+treaty&f-order=relevance</small> | |||
Latest revision as of 14:47, 5 March 2022
Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research
Limited nuclear war ... dangerous far beyond the region fatally hit
Even a limited nuclear war could have dangerous effects far beyond the region that is fatally hit. It would result in global cooling that substantially reduces agricultural production in the world’s main breadbasket regions, from the US, to Europe, Russia, and China. The particular effect on food security worldwide including trade responses has now for the first time been revealed by an international team of scientists in a study based on advanced computer simulations. The sudden temperature reduction would lead to a food system shock unprecedented in documented history. It would not undo long-term climate change from fossil fuels use, though – after about a decade of cooling, global warming would surge again.
Strategic Demands
Regional Nuclear Conflict will deliver, science says, Global Nuclear Catastrophe
@StrategicDemands.com:
As nuclear treaties, agreements, and negotiations fall by the wayside, the JCPOA, the INF, NewSTART, and others, and the U.S., Russia, and China race to build a next generation of nuclear capabilities, there are those, like Lindsey Graham from South Carolina who seem to be saying that if U.S. negotiations with North Korea fail, then war is the answer, one way or the other, seeming to say that nuclear exchanges are acceptable. Nuclear weapons use, nuclear weapons exchanges are not acceptable.
What is rarely understood is the current new nuclear arms race, with new warheads, new MIRVs, new (nuclear) pit production, new delivery systems, new tactical (‘usable’) nukes, new ‘dial-up’ nukes, new cruise nukes, new hypersonic nukes…
The collapse of nuclear arms control architecture is accompanied by multi-nation, multi-billion spending, much of it in secret, a race toward human and environmental disaster. The next generation of nuclear weapons is not providing added security, it is delivering a ticking clock…
(SJS)
🌎
Updated / First week of February 2022
January 2022
A Proposed Ukraine Fix: Act Now to Expand the INF Agreement
2019
https://www.nti.org/search/?f-search=inf+treaty&f-order=relevance
File history
Click on a date/time to view the file as it appeared at that time.
Date/Time | Thumbnail | Dimensions | User | Comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
current | 14:01, 5 March 2022 | 480 × 505 (442 KB) | Siterunner (talk | contribs) |
You cannot overwrite this file.
File usage
The following 2 pages use this file:
- Ukraine
- United Nations
- Anthropocene
- Eurasia
- Environmental Security
- Environmental Security, National Security
- Europe
- European Union
- Global Security
- Green Graphics
- Green Party
- Green Politics
- Middle East
- New Definitions of National Security
- North America
- Nuclear Free
- Nuclear Nonproliferation
- Nuclear Proliferation
- Nuclear Weapons
- Peace
- Radioactive Pollution
- Radioactive Waste
- Russian Federation
- Strategic Demands
- Threat Multiplier
- Whole Earth
- China
- France
- India
- Israel
- North Korea
- Pakistan
- UK
- US