I’m not gonna bother posting a Reddit screenshot or a tweet. We’ve all seen enough, and way more than it’s healthy. Just wanna say, people really support shit ideas that will pretty much inevitably end with a nuclear exchange. It’s really depressing to see people foaming at the mouth with racist warhawk takes. That’s all.

  • mylifeforaiur
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 years ago

    The nukes are much, much worse. Nuclear winter could mean the death of every plant and every animal that depends on plants. That means the extinction of all human life, even tribes. Climate change is bad, but nuclear winter is several orders of magnitude worse.

    • teensndants
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 years ago

      Honestly I think you both make great points but with one option verging on inevitable at this point and the other playing nuke roulette.

      Like either way they’re both terrible fucking options with a death prize at the end.

      Sure nukes are immediate death but we gotta acknowledge climate change is currently wiping out food and water supply in developing nations.

      CC is essentially decimation by another name, just hasn’t hit cinemas (as much) in the West yet.

      • bleepingblorp
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        A lot of people here talking as if one won’t likely lead to another. Climate change creates more scarcity. More scarcity means conventional war is more likely. More conventional war means more likely chance of non-conventional war as stakes increase.

        As soon as conventional forces get within an arbitrary distance of a nuclear site or threaten to corner leaders, woosh up the missiles go.

    • holdengreen
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 years ago

      It depends on how much land coverage all the nukes will have. Regardless they will be devastating for human civilization.