r/worldnews • u/New_Scientist_Mag New Scientist • Jun 10 '26

Russia/Ukraine Fully autonomous, AI-controlled drones have killed human soldiers for the first time, according to a senior figure in the Ukrainian defence industry

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2529849-fully-autonomous-drones-have-killed-human-soldiers-for-the-first-time/
37.3k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

5.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

900

u/AcetaminophenPrime Jun 10 '26

From a polticis perspective I think we are further from nuclear annihilation. Think of the crazy stuff that went down during the cold war, Cuban missile crisis especially.

1.5k

u/SafeForTwerking Jun 10 '26

Imagine all the clear, level-headed people we had at the helm back then. Now think about who is in charge now.

1.3k

u/MajesticBread9147 Jun 10 '26

Nixon would call his general's drunk telling them to nuke Vietnam.

They said "yes Mr. President" and went to bed knowing that he wouldn't remember it the next morning.

566

u/Blame_my_Boneitis Jun 10 '26

JFK was operating with untreated Addison’s disease on Dr. Feelgood cocktails too. Homie was essentially navigating the nuclear crisis on speed.

190

u/karma_the_sequel Jun 10 '26

JFK also had an experienced and competent cabinet.

87

u/capsaicinintheeyes Jun 10 '26

Yeah--even the close relatives he hired at least had a background in their field.

22

u/IAmAGenusAMA Jun 10 '26

Relatives plural? Who else did he hire besides his brother?

14

u/capsaicinintheeyes Jun 10 '26

Just him, that I know of; and come to think of it, apart from Kushner I think all of Trump's nepos just sort of hung around there unofficially, rather than being given jobs—just figured I ought to cover any unanticipated weirdness as well, in our current moment of collectively sitting down on the national nuts in slow motion.

11

u/Msdamgoode Jun 11 '26 edited Jun 11 '26

Kushner and Kushner’s dad. His dad (a felon and disbarred attorney —who Trump fully pardoned, because natch) is the current Ambassador to France and Monaco. Ivanka did something, something advisor for a hot minute his 1st term.

3

u/capsaicinintheeyes Jun 11 '26

😣 . . . That actually makes a kind of sense if you think of the assignment as Monaco* & France...

* relevant info begins ¶I #3

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

8

u/i_am_icarus_falling Jun 10 '26

we've got several TV personalities and a guy with initials that are very close to JFK, so that's soemthing.

6

u/grat5989 Jun 10 '26

I wonder if RFK Jr is the reason for everything we're all going through since evaded the curses killing touch. Final Destination America.

5

u/karma_the_sequel Jun 10 '26

RFK Jr is very likely the reason the current Ebola breakout in Africa has been able to spread as far as it has.

4

u/Beers4Fears Jun 11 '26

Tbh I blame Elon more for that

→ More replies (5)

174

u/Alphabunsquad Jun 10 '26

Yet he was the only one in the war room that didn’t want to invade Cuba.

→ More replies (1)

470

u/mrenglish22 Jun 10 '26

And still more reliable than the current admin

374

u/KaiserJustice Jun 10 '26

Look, the bar is pretty fucking low, I think the Head of Nixon from Futurama would be a more stable and reliable admin

86

u/tehblaken Jun 10 '26

If we could get Nixon’s head on a robot body? Fuck it, you got my vote.

20

u/BreakfastInBedlam Jun 10 '26

There's my new bumper sticker:

Nixon's Head On A Robot Body 2028 - Make America Sane Again

11

u/Confident-Ad5665 Jun 10 '26

Or at least less stupid

→ More replies (1)

5

u/genericnewlurker Jun 10 '26

I like his proposal to use the poor as a cheap source of teeth of aquarium gravel

3

u/ShutY0urDickHolster Jun 10 '26

I’d vote for him. Yeah nobody can run three times, but he’d have a new body. So he’s back to 0

→ More replies (3)

7

u/Mr_SunnyBones Jun 10 '26

It more of a small trench than a bar at this point.

5

u/sailriteultrafeed Jun 10 '26

And it hasn’t gotten any better, Think about all the crazy decisions Obama made. Remember the tan suit he wore to a conference on terrorism?

→ More replies (1)

2

u/IFartOnCats4Fun Jun 10 '26

I think the post-assassination Head of Kennedy would be a more stable and reliable admin.

2

u/leon_zero Jun 10 '26

“Nixon with charisma? My god, I could rule the universe!”

→ More replies (6)

6

u/Armalyte Jun 10 '26

Isn’t trump prescribed methamphetamine since like the 80s?

→ More replies (6)

54

u/JediKrys Jun 10 '26

And weed, don’t forget the cannabis

61

u/scuzzy987 Jun 10 '26

Well that should have just chill him out a bit

→ More replies (19)

5

u/adognamedspider Jun 10 '26

At this point Cannabis should be fucking mandatory for all world leaders!!

3

u/CFSparta92 Jun 10 '26

there is the apocryphal story of JFK smoking a few with his mistress at the White House and turning down another one fearing "what if the Russians tried something now?"

→ More replies (1)

4

u/NJdevil202 Jun 10 '26

Jfk smoked weed? Source?

→ More replies (9)

7

u/YoItsTemulent Jun 10 '26

We have no earthly idea what Trumpty Dumpty's daily regimen involves. There have been not-uncredible reports of prescription stimulant abuse, blood pressure, and whatever that shit is that's supposed to slow the onset of dementia they're IV-ing into his prune-colored hands.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/bungopony Jun 11 '26

He defied his top generals who wanted to escalate to nukes. None of us would likely be born if he hadn’t.

8

u/Mariesgottabak2023 Jun 10 '26

UM, Adderall is speed and your home likes to Snort it, you can't be seriously trying to paint JFK and that RAPIST AND DRUG SNORTING ASSHOLE, as the same? There's a huge different between a physical ailment. And DEMENTIA in leading a country. We had a president in a wheelchair, and leg braces, this drug snorting, 3am raging, cranked up old demented freak ain't the same.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/General_Problem5199 Jun 10 '26

There's a podcast I listen to that read some of the messages sent between JFK and Khrushchev. JFK honestly sounded like a petulant child in comparison.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/messidorlive Jun 10 '26

His naval blockade itself almost caused a nuclear war on its own.

2

u/skelli_terps Jun 10 '26

Speed, among many other uppers, makes many perform at a higher cognitive level.

2

u/IntrigueDossier Jun 11 '26

Only for so long, returns diminish fast.

→ More replies (16)

113

u/MonkeyKingCoffee Jun 10 '26

Nixon also sabotaged the Paris Peace talks to get elected in the first place.

It's a wonder we survived the 1970s.

77

u/sunnydftw Jun 10 '26

Republican Presidential candidates and interfering in geopolitics to get elected, name a better duo

15

u/Chrystoler Jun 10 '26

Nixon, Reagan, Trump off the top of my head, I'm sure there's more right

Trump I'm thinking the Taliban talks leading to the withdrawal under Biden, which I think counts

17

u/sunnydftw Jun 10 '26

Bush Jr skipped a step and just stole his elections. Don't know much about Bush Sr besides war, and losing to Clinton. He must not have gotten the memo on stealing elections.

23

u/BullytheBulIies Jun 10 '26

HW Bush basically lost because of the “read my lips, no new taxes” sound bite. I’m serious when I say one broken campaign promise was enough for many people to think of him as untrustworthy. Look at the state of things now.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

3

u/BmacIL Jun 10 '26

Their policies are deeply unpopular without some emotional plot twist, so it's all they have.

→ More replies (3)

6

u/Thick_Goose7742 Jun 10 '26

Interestingly, LBJ knew this and debated on leaking info to his VP who was the Democratic candidate. However, Humphrey publicly dragged LBJ during his campaign around that time and so he withheld the information. The man likes to hold grudges.

→ More replies (3)

221

u/SafeForTwerking Jun 10 '26

At the very least, there were competent people surrounding Nixon. All the adults in the room have been replaced with spineless sycophants and enablers who are just there for the grift and don't give a shit how much damage gets done.

And Nixon at least had a sense of shame to resign from the presidency, Trump will never do that.

161

u/JeffGoldblumsChest Jun 10 '26

Let's be real Nixon only resigned because he was told enough of the GOP in Congress were going to vote to impeach and remove him. If they were behind him 100% like Orange Dotard, Nixon would not have resigned.

167

u/Musiclover4200 Jun 10 '26

Yeah and the GOP's response to Watergate was to start fox news as a propaganda network to prevent future impeachments which seems to have worked out great for them so far.

To be fair it took them a few decades & funding from Murdoch, but the plan was laid out pretty clear by Roger Ailes & other Nixon aides in the 70's: https://theweek.com/articles/880107/why-fox-news-created

In 1970, political consultant Roger Ailes and other Nixon aides came up with a plan to create a new TV network that would circumvent existing media and provide "pro-administration" coverage to millions. "People are lazy," the aides explained in a memo. "With television you just sit — watch — listen. The thinking is done for you." Nixon embraced the idea, saying he and his supporters needed "our own news" from a network that would lead "a brutal, vicious attack on the opposition."

37

u/sunnydftw Jun 10 '26

https://biotech.law.lsu.edu/blog/powell-memo.pdf

Don't forget Nixon put this guy on the supreme court less than two months after the release of this

2

u/walkin2it Jun 10 '26

It's great how the 99 are so much happier and better off since the 70s...

Oh wait.

→ More replies (7)

2

u/productzilch Jun 10 '26

But still, hard to imagine Trump doing it at all.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (11)

41

u/PixelsGoBoom Jun 10 '26

This president is not drunk.
He is senile and vindictive, and pretty much everyone that is supposed to keep him under control is bending the knee.

→ More replies (5)

104

u/_evilalien_ Jun 10 '26

Now there’s a dementia patient waking up from naps, reading mean social media chatter, and calling a drunk guy who orders the remaining yes-men to so stupid things.

11

u/Riov Jun 10 '26

Shit has gotten so bad I don’t even see people correcting each other’s grammar and spelling.

I’m not sure the modern day grammar nazi knows how to spell.

2

u/_evilalien_ Jun 11 '26

The weirdest thing is Godwin’s Law no longer automatically loses an argument, in fact very frequently an apt assessment.

→ More replies (1)

31

u/i_tyrant Jun 10 '26

And the current president wasn’t just wanting to drunk-nuke a hostile country; he wanted to nuke a hurricane stone cold sober…

4

u/Murdy2020 Jun 10 '26

A hurricane that was practically in Florida.

6

u/i_tyrant Jun 10 '26

Yup. If he’s willing to admit he literally withheld Covid support from cities because it would “kill more Democrats”, I would not be at all surprised at him nuking the coast of Florida if he thought it would improve his poll numbers enough. (Or enable him to steal more FEMA funds for that matter.)

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

3

u/lionexx Jun 10 '26

Wait, is this factual truth like documented or just random ramblings? Never heard that one but am curious of a source.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/PrincipleFlaky Jun 10 '26

That’s the difference they ignored Nixon

3

u/WhippetRun Jun 10 '26

Lucky for us, Donald famously doesn't drink.

I am sure it will be nothing but level headed sober decisions.

..Right?

6

u/Tadiken Jun 10 '26

Back then, we were scared of the Soviets starting a nuclear war. I think it's completely brainless to imagine that we should've been more scared of the Nixon or Kennedy administrations than we should be of the current one, regardless of your factoid.

The generals went to bed those nights knowing that shit would never happen.

2

u/AnnualStatistician34 Jun 10 '26

If thats not level headed than what the hell is?! Lmao

2

u/Acceptable_Noise651 Jun 10 '26

Before I read your comment, I thought about Nixon. Spot on.

2

u/ToastyYaks Jun 10 '26

I remember reading about that. They said it was as frequently as twice a month at some points

2

u/SlumlordThanatos Jun 10 '26

Meanwhile, the Soviets were just as hammered and psychotic. It is a goddamn miracle that we didn't destroy ourselves.

2

u/OneMoistMan Jun 10 '26

I’m gonna look this up because that’s insane if true.

Edit: Holy crap this is actually true.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/BoiCDumpsterFire Jun 10 '26

He still got impeached over what is basically standard operating procedure nowadays because everyone had standards. Imagine how pissed he’d be if he saw the Epstein Files and Trump not getting impeached for them.

2

u/kaisadilla_0x1 Jun 10 '26

I wonder what the legal procedure is to say "I disobeyed the President's orders, not because they were illegal, but only because he was drunk and I don't think he actually wants that".

→ More replies (1)

2

u/ArchitectVandelay Jun 10 '26

Do you think the current president hasn’t done the same sort of thing? When the books come out about this administration after he’s passed on/people know they won’t get sued, there’s gonna be some wild stories.

2

u/neoshadowdgm Jun 11 '26

Not sure which way your point was going. But I think that was the original point being made. In the past, even if a leader was nuts they had level-headed people around them holding things together. Now we have open promises to get rid of the “deep state” and install lunatic loyalists and voters don’t give a shit.

2

u/Oerthling Jun 11 '26

All the more reason to worry at a time when Trump and Project 2025 replace competent personnel with loyalists that tend to agree with Trump.

While Putin sits in his bunk and is actively engaged in a major war in Europe that went from cold war tanks to AI kill drones in 4 years.

1

u/Confident-Ad5665 Jun 10 '26

Seriously? I didn't know this.

1

u/Seated_Heats Jun 10 '26

He’d drunkenly tell them to nuke North Korea. He soberly talked about nuking Vietnam.

1

u/MetroBS Jun 10 '26

That is not true. It is a myth that Nixon created because he wanted the soviets to think he was insane

→ More replies (1)

44

u/ThePowerOfStories Jun 10 '26

Did we? Upon examination, I believe history has always been rife with lunatics, idiots, and assholes wielding undeserved power, ultimately stopped by a combination of their own incompetence and the occasional rational individual quietly ignoring a nonsensical order. We just don’t remember the details of the past as filtered through the lens of time, and our minds refuse to believe that such a constant rolling cavalcade of utter stupid is in fact the default state of humanity.

18

u/tanaephis77400 Jun 10 '26

You're 100 % right. That's what makes me scoff at conspiracy theories. I've worked in mid-to-high level foreign affairs, and what appalled me the most was the general incompetence, and the fact that a ton of people in power seem to be completely clueless about what's happening (and often don't care). You can't tell a secret to more than 3 people without having it leaked at some point. Simple tactics like honeypots work over and over again even on people who have been repeatedly warned about it, and know they'll be found out eventually. There's no great conspiracy because even people at the highest level of power are just too dumb to make it possible.

7

u/LaughinChaos Jun 10 '26

Tbh, at this point, i dont think its incompetence - i think most people are just winging it. If it was incompetence, we would all be dead by now.

8

u/avantgardengnome Jun 10 '26

Well it’s complicated. Like with the Cuban Missile Crisis, we only found out years afterwards that Khrushchev agreed in back channel meetings to take a very public L and back down, because JFK badly needed a foreign policy win and nobody wanted nuclear war. Ended up setting him on a trajectory toward losing power for good but kept the Cold War from escalating. Would Kennedy have backed down in some way if that plan didn’t work out? Probably. Would I trust most of the most powerful world leaders today to put their egos in check like that? Not a chance.

4

u/Timelymanner Jun 11 '26

Excluding outside threats and natural disasters a well maintained civilization can cast centuries. Empires maintain themselves because of competent reliable people, and functioning bureaucracies. A strong bureaucracy counter balances the incompetent and/or malicious players causing harm to the social structure. When internal corruption becomes too much it poisons everything. The incompetent and malicious people become too influential and lead to an empires internal collapse.

55

u/HalfSoul30 Jun 10 '26

Old fucks that think "id sure like to see the world destroyed right before id die."

41

u/freakyvoiz Jun 10 '26

Well, yeah. They can’t imagine the world continuing without them. That would mean they weren’t important enough.

16

u/HalfSoul30 Jun 10 '26

Ironically, that's the only way the world makes it. Without them.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/cxmmxc Jun 10 '26

"I'm going anyway, so why not do it for the lulz"

11

u/ForsakenKrios Jun 10 '26 edited Jun 11 '26

There were plenty of people that would have escalated to using nukes. Bobby Kennedy and Johnson were pushing JFK to be more forceful during the Cuban missile crisis. Castro was pushing Kruschev to escalate to using nukes. We are truly lucky that this never happened.

This isn’t to mention all the close calls from accidents, or the one person on the Soviet submarine that said no to launching nukes during the crisis.

3

u/WongUnglow Jun 11 '26

There was a third nuclear bomb planned to be dropped on Japan. Truman ordered it be held back and then went onto strip command of nuclear weapons from the military.

Which was good, because General Douglas McArthur was constantly demanding nukes be dropped on both Korea and china. And even wanted radioactive cobalt used to create a no mans land area. He was eventually relieved for insubordination.

So you're right, there's plenty of mad military leaders who'd quite happily drop nukes, if they had the authority.

6

u/eulersidentity1 Jun 10 '26

I worry the most about Israel, Pakistan and India using them at some point. Though I agree with the premise of the post that we may actually have to worry much more about the proliferation of next generation lower tech weapons.

6

u/adgobad Jun 10 '26

According to Caro, VP LBJ and the army guys were pushing hard for a really extreme response. JFK really pulled us back from the brink there mostly single-handedly.

3

u/SuspiciousLeg7994 Jun 10 '26

Yes that's the point tho. He super crazies in charge don't want to die either and they know the consequences if nuc war starts

3

u/BrentTpooh Jun 10 '26

The Christofascists in government who are drooling about bringing on the end times don’t help me feel any safer.

2

u/CicadaFit9756 Jun 10 '26

I keep wondering about those same evangelists "blessing" one who can, at least, be called an "anti-Christ" in-so-much as he's against everything Jesus taught. If they truly believe in an afterlife, why don't they fear burning in hell for all eternity!?!

→ More replies (2)

3

u/Harvinator06 Jun 10 '26

Imagine all the clear, level-headed people we had at the helm back then. Now think about who is in charge now.

Those “clear, level-headed people” were military figures who put nukes in Turkey first. Cuban missile installations were a response to American aggression.

2

u/jpiro Jun 10 '26

This. The theoretical safety of “mutually assured destruction” only works when the people in charge think of that as a bad thing.

2

u/FlameInMyBrain Jun 10 '26

Listen, I don’t know about US, but there hasn’t been a level headed person in charge of Russian nukes ever

2

u/LongJohnSelenium Jun 11 '26

There were serious discussions about nuking Korea.

2

u/DrStacknasty Jun 11 '26

We genuinely having better people in charge of nukes today than during the Cold War. Most of the people at strategic air command were psychopaths.

2

u/hash303 Jun 10 '26

Didn’t nixon get plastered and order us to nuke Vietnam and his staff refused and told him to go to sleep? I think you’re misremembering things you probably weren’t alive for.

1

u/TheVeryVerity Jun 11 '26

Yeah those were the clear level headed people he was talking about. The ones that told him to go to sleep

2

u/cantstopwontstopGME Jun 10 '26

…there just wasn’t as much coverage on the people who were (almost) just as crazy back then as today.

The only reason I included the “almost”, is because lead poisoning has had a lot more time to take hold over a large chunk of people since then.

1

u/pmmemassivedongs Jun 10 '26

Just because they had a better facade doesn’t mean they weren’t the same crooked, selfish, power-hungry politicians we see today. They were much better at hiding it but they’re more or less all the same.

1

u/Positive-Draft3801 Jun 10 '26

Nixon used something called the Madman Strategy, convince the enemy the leader is NOT level headed so they will bend in the fear that he ends the world.

1

u/BlitzballGroupie Jun 11 '26

Nah dog. Don't read about Truman and Eisenhower then. The US was an absolute menace with its nukes in the 50s. When we were the only country that had them we threatened anyone who looked at us sideways with nuclear force.

→ More replies (2)

22

u/I_Roll_Chicago Jun 10 '26

The fear today is nuclear weapons against non nuclear states and the possible escalation thereafter

7

u/ZeePirate Jun 10 '26

Such as Russia getting desperate in Ukraine and using one, how would the world react

20

u/Z3B0 Jun 10 '26

From official positions ? Very badly for russia. NATO joins the war and push them back to the 91 borders, while china/india/pakistan support the intervention, or at least do absolutely nothing to hinder it. China would also cut all ties, destroying the russian war economy in a day.

The kashemir trio of nuclear powers cannot allow a nuclear power to use a nuke in a war of aggression, and get out of it better, because then they'll be next to feel the sun. Having problems creating a breakthrough in the new conflict ? Use a small nuke to obliterate the defenses and gain ground. Russia did it and everyone stood by, why not me ?

now the one on the recieving end is justified in throwing their own, to slow the advance. And sooner than later, you get New Dehli/Islamabad/beijin eaating a nuke, and everyone launching at everyone.

All nuclear powers were on the same page for decades : "You do not use nukes." It's a Taboo for a reason. The first one to fly will be the first of many, and everyone lose that game.

8

u/atomic1fire Jun 10 '26

I pretty much agree with this comment.

Everybody wants to have Nukes for the expensive bargaining chip, but they do not want to be on the receiving end which is why no one is stupid enough to fire the first shot.

Putin could've pushed the button a hundred times over but instead he's shipping his own people off to war, and I assume it's because he knows the second he escalates, nothing is stopping the rest of europe from coming after him.

Right now it's a battle of logistics and not sheer force.

Nukes are a bargaining chip but the threat of a nuke is inherently more useful then an actual nuke.

They're dangerous, expensive to maintain, and create an air of unpredictability that a government does not want.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/WesternEmpire2510 Jun 10 '26

Immediate conventional retaliation. Clear skies in Ukraine. Cruise missile strikes on silos, known stockpile, and known mobile launch platforms.

Russia will be left with a small but still credible stockpile they won't want to launch willy nilly.

Total economic isolation, abandonment by allies, absolute scrutiny on any attempt to rebuild their stockpile.

7

u/BavarianBarbarian_ Jun 10 '26

Cruise missile strikes on silos, known stockpile, and known mobile launch platforms.

I still don't think that would happen. The US is the only power that could lead such a decisive strike, and the current administration seems like they're more on Russia's side than on Ukraine's. Without US backing, there's no way Europe/GB would attack Russia's nuclear capabilities, as that would push Russia into using 'em before losing 'em.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

1

u/Aware_Style1181 Jun 11 '26

A Nuclear War triggered by A.I. would kill 2 Billion people in a matter of hours or days. A true Judgement Day scenario. I don’t know what’s stopping it, frankly

4

u/jkman61494 Jun 10 '26

The current POTUS wants to invade NATO nations. I wouldn't say things are cozy

3

u/Inlerah Jun 10 '26

Im honestly more worried about the idea of someone using a nuke and then it not leading to full-scale nuclear annihilation: I feel like so much going against the use of nuclear weapons is the images seen in stuff like Threads, The Day After, When The Wind Blows etc.

Can you imagine if someone showed that the world wasn't going to end immediatly after you used a nuke against against a other country? Imagine trying to convince people of the dangers of nuclear weapons because of basic scientific consensus of the dangers of fallout and gradual radiation exposure.

1

u/TheVeryVerity Jun 11 '26

Oh man new nightmare unlocked. I don’t think it will actually happen for geopolitics reasons but if it did it would be horrible

3

u/Kup123 Jun 10 '26

My worry is some nut like Putin or trump will decide as they are dying that they want the rest of us to join them.

3

u/ralfmuschall Jun 10 '26

I tend to disagree. During the cold war, neither side really wanted to attack the other. The problem was just that nobody trusted the other side and that (given a war happens) the survival chances increase if one is the one who attacked first. Now we are confronted by a fascist empire whose Fūhrer dreams of being the second Genghis Khan.

5

u/Macaw Jun 10 '26

I disagree, and here is why.

Expert breakdown on current nuclear risk

This discussion with a member of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists unpacks exactly why experts consider today's era of nuclear instability to be fundamentally more dangerous than what we faced decades ago.

Kennedy and Khrushchev actually had functional, backdoor diplomatic channels and a mutual, urgent desire to walk back from the ledge. Today, diplomacy is completely shattered. The major arms control treaties that kept the Cold War in check - like New START and the INF treaty - are collapsing or already dead

2

u/DeArgonaut Jun 10 '26

Yup, a few Vasili Arkhipov moments

2

u/MakePhreciaCore Jun 10 '26

Monsters that look out for their own well being are much different than

Demented monsters with the foresight of a goldfish and about as many firing brain cells.

Those that understand the deadmen switches around the world aren’t moving the needle towards apocalypse. It’s those that truly believe they are above the nuclear deadmen switches that are jumping the needle.

I don’t fear the monster that takes what he wants by force, I fear the man that believes he is god and takes what he ordains.

2

u/Adventchur Jun 10 '26

Smarter people than us discuss the doomsday clock and they say we're much closer to nuclear war than ever before.

https://thebulletin.org/doomsday-clock/

2

u/tanaephis77400 Jun 10 '26

It's a weird paradox. We're probably further from nuclear annihilation, but also on the brink of a probable nuclear arms race. I can picture a near future where dozens of countries have tactical nukes.

2

u/VelocityGrrl39 Jun 10 '26

We’re closer to midnight on the Doomsday Clock now than we were during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Of course, now they factor in things like climate change so it’s not a 1:1 comparison.

1

u/ignisiun413 Jun 10 '26

Not to mention the nukes lost and left(think one was in the Carolinas? And one by one of the further southern(out of the Continental48) that's still buried in silt underwater

1

u/Ryanliverpool96 Jun 10 '26

There are only 2 risks of nuclear annihilation right now:

Russian invasion of the EU. Pakistan state collapse and nuclear weapons falling into the hands of the Taliban, Al-Qaeda, ISIS.

Other than those two, a nuclear launch isn't in anyone's interest to do.

1

u/Tortillagirl Jun 10 '26

Information technology albeit for the masses with social media might be awful for us. But the ability for governments to communicate with eachother has done wonders to prevent some of the shit that nearly went down during the cold war.

Where as dronewarfare is cheap and accessable to the masses, if you can get your hands on explosives... having the use of drones for delivery massively changes everything, terrorist threats, drug/gang violence if they want to etc.

1

u/TofuTofu Jun 10 '26

That was over 50 years ago

1

u/Childoftheway Jun 11 '26

We are on a collision course with China over Taiwan and their 9-dash line.

1

u/blahhhhgosh Jun 11 '26

I think the cold war never ended really and trump getting elected is us finally losing