Post reply

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:

Verification:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview


Topic Summary

Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: January 17, 2026, 04:34:27 pm »

No one had nukes from prehistory until the 1940s. Western civilization changed it all:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_nuclear_weapons

Quote
In the first decades of the 19th century, physics was revolutionized with developments in the understanding of the nature of atoms including the discoveries in atomic theory by John Dalton.[1] Around the turn of the 20th century, it was discovered by Hans Geiger and Ernest Marsden and then Ernest Rutherford, that atoms had a highly dense, very small, charged central core called an atomic nucleus. In 1898, Pierre and Marie Curie discovered that pitchblende, an ore of uranium, contained a substance—which they named radium—that emitted large amounts of radiation. Ernest Rutherford and Frederick Soddy identified that atoms were breaking down and turning into different elements. Hopes were raised among scientists and laymen that the elements around us could contain tremendous amounts of unseen energy, waiting to be harnessed. In 1905, Albert Einstein described this potential in his famous equation, E = mc2.

H. G. Wells was inspired by the work of Rutherford to write about an "atom bomb" in a 1914 novel, The World Set Free, which appeared shortly before the First World War.[2] In a 1924 article, Winston Churchill speculated about the possible military implications: "Might not a bomb no bigger than an orange be found to possess a secret power to destroy a whole block of buildings—nay to concentrate the force of a thousand tons of cordite and blast a township at a stroke?"[3]

At the time however, there was no known mechanism which could be used to unlock the vast energy potential that was theorized to exist inside the atom. The only particle then known to exist within the nucleus was the positively-charged proton, which would act to repel protons set in motion towards it. Then in 1932, a key breakthrough was made with the discovery of the neutron. Having no electric charge, the neutron is able to penetrate the nucleus with relative ease.

But Westerners never blame Western science and machinism. In contrast:

Quote
In January 1933, the Nazis came to power in Germany and suppressed Jewish scientists.

But even this was not enough:

Quote
Physicist Leo Szilard fled to London where, in 1934, he patented the idea of a nuclear chain reaction using neutrons. The patent also introduced the term critical mass to describe the minimum amount of material required to sustain the chain reaction and its potential to cause an explosion (British patent 630,726).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_Szilard

Quote
He was born as Leó Spitz in Budapest, Kingdom of Hungary, on February 11, 1898. His middle-class Jewish parents

Szilard should have been executed before he was able to flee.
Posted by: PeacefulPeasant
« on: January 17, 2026, 04:19:12 am »

In a fairer world either everyone has nukes, or no one has nukes. This should be the first indicator to most that this world is not even close to being fair, and many are working over time to ensure it remains unfair, especially to those that do not have "white skin". How long will this continue before balance is restored by lynching all the "whites"?
Posted by: PotatoChip
« on: December 14, 2025, 10:25:20 pm »

Lest we forget this assessment in which (starting @45:28) Taiwan bares the full brunt of a nuclear escalation between the US and China. I suspect Japan's nukes, if it has them by then, would also be used on Taiwan?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UsrCWehWSuU
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: December 14, 2025, 09:07:04 pm »

On elementary inspection, Japan getting nukes would appear to help us, as it increases the global ratio of nukes in "non-white" hands relative to nukes in "white" hands, which reduces our disadvantage in a hypothetical Turner-Diaries-style confrontation.

But the above paragraph assumes Japan would actually use its nukes the way we want it to, which is currently unrealistic. Under current circumstances, it is far more likely that Japan would point them at China, and China seeing a nuclear-armed Japan would similarly point its own nukes towards Japan. Thus the real effect is to increase the global ratio of nukes pointed towards "non-whites" (which is Trump's and Putin's actual intention) relative to nukes pointed towards "whites", which increases our disadvantage.

The best way to undermine the Trump-Putin plan would be for China to become the strongest public voice supporting a nuclear-armed Japan (including offering whatever practical assistance might be needed towards this end), which would reassure Japan that China has no intention of nuking itself, which would reciprocally also enable China to feel safer knowing that Japan now has no way to credibly accuse China of hostility towards itself. This is folkism.

Of course, the above paragraph will obviously never happen under Xi (though I would love to be proven wrong). So, my conclusion remains unchanged: no improvement can be expected until Xi is replaced by a folkist.
Posted by: PotatoChip
« on: December 14, 2025, 07:48:03 pm »

Posted by: SodaPop
« on: November 09, 2025, 01:51:04 pm »

Will Trump Spark a New Nuclear Arms Race?
Quote
Trump's recent suggestion that the US will soon re-engage in nuclear weapons testing has up-ended decades of policy and sparked anxiety that we could be entering a new nuclear age, with other major powers stepping up efforts to modernise their capability.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcyGbqR9GgQ

Noteworthy:

DOWNWIND - Official Trailer
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcyGbqR9GgQ

Posted by: SodaPop
« on: November 07, 2025, 05:17:47 pm »

Are we entering a new era of nuclear weapons testing? | GZERO Europe
Quote
Former Swedish Prime Minister Carl Bildt asks whether the world is sliding back into the dangerous era of open nuclear weapons testing, and it all started with a misunderstanding by US President Donald Trump misunderstanding.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/are-we-entering-a-new-era-of-nuclear-weapons-testing-gzero-europe/vi-AA1Q1yi1?ocid=msedgntp&pc=ASTS&cvid=690e7bbfd9af4adaa53b76500ba55ed4&ei=112
Posted by: WMD
« on: March 19, 2025, 09:19:51 pm »

Germany's doubts about US are causing it to rethink having nuclear weapons | DW News
Quote
Germany's incoming chancellor Friedrich Merz says he no longer believes US security commitments to Europe can be taken for granted. And that's led to doubts about the future of the US nuclear umbrella for Germany. That in turn has reignited a debate in Germany and beyond about rethinking Europe’s nuclear set-up.

Chapters:
0:00 Germany considering options after US doubts
3:11 Frankziska Stärk, Nuclear Deterrence Researcher
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Tw1GPjHvF8
Posted by: WMD
« on: March 17, 2025, 10:14:36 pm »

Poland Wants to Go Nuclear. And More.
Quote
From Poland’s nuclear ambitions to China’s military provocations and Syria’s insurgency nightmare, the world is on edge. Here’s your in-depth briefing on this week’s most critical global events.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20ze-VQyHoA

Europe's Nuclear Future
Quote
Recent events have invigorated a discussion of the disposition of nuclear weapons in Europe. In a speech on March 5, French President Emmanuel Macron declared that "Europe's future does not have to be decided in Washington or Moscow," and called for discussions on the expansion of the French nuclear umbrella to European allies. Frontline countries such as Poland have embraced opening this dialogue. Meanwhile, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk has declared that Poland "must reach for the most modern possibilities, also related to nuclear weapons and modern unconventional weapons."

What might a French nuclear umbrella or Polish nuclear capability look like? What are the implications for broader NATO defense efforts? Please join the CSIS Defense and Security Department for a conversation on the future of European rearmament, nuclear deterrence, and transatlantic relations, featuring Dr. Heather Williams, director of the CSIS Project on Nuclear Issues, Dr. Tom Karako, director of the CSIS Missile Defense Project, and Kari A. Bingen, director of the CSIS Aerospace Security Project.

This event is made possible by general support to CSIS.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWyjbFr9Vas
Posted by: rp
« on: March 11, 2025, 05:02:46 pm »

Day by day my youthful optimism is fading. I feel like I am being forced to accept the initiated violence occuring all around me, which is why I contemplated annihilation as the only option. It is becoming hard to function normally..
Posted by: rp
« on: March 11, 2025, 04:48:40 pm »

Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: March 11, 2025, 03:51:52 pm »

There will be survivors, and those whose bloodlines propagate most successfully in the anarchic aftermath will be those with the strongest survivalist traits. Basically it would be a pro-Darwinian reset. Our entire approach, in contrast, is about state control over reproduction and eliminating the most dangerous bloodlines first.
Posted by: rp
« on: March 11, 2025, 02:19:29 am »

Why are we opposed to nuclear annihilation? Wouldn't this theoretically achieve our end goal of zero population?
Posted by: rp
« on: April 26, 2024, 12:57:38 am »

https://twitter.com/sushantsareen/status/1782279258552893578?t=ySkSQ_SYke5CnqcIzrVBEA&s=19
Quote
Seriously?? The way I see it, if you got the guns, you will get the grains; if you got grains but no guns, you will lose the grains. This is not an either/or issue. The future belongs to nations which have both guns and grains.
Quote
#MondayMotivation
“The future belongs to nations with grains and not guns.” - M. S. Swaminathan