Also, is America benefiting from the war?

  • starkillerfish (she)
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Japan had the infrastructure left to rebuild those cities. If a full nuclear exchange occurs, there will be no infrastructure, no healthy land for agriculture, no population to rebuild anything, there is just no possibility of recovery. I’m sorry but your take is unhinged.

      • starkillerfish (she)
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        True, I do enjoy reading more. Any literature you can recommend on the topic? I’m mostly relying on my understanding of nuclear famine, and the logical consequences of destroying vast amounts of infrastructure and population.

          • starkillerfish (she)
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            I would argue that the destruction of major productive centers would be as disastrous as climate change. Why can’t both be true?

            I could also be minimizing the threat of climate change by saying that the world won’t end because of it. It is an unreasonable bar however for us to consider something to be destructive. I don’t think it’s controversial to not want millions of deaths.

          • CriticalResist8A
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Incredible how we went from “I don’t know what world war 3 will be fought with, but I know that world war 4 will be fought with sticks and stones” to “actually nuclear war isn’t so bad, it’s just a temporary hurdle”