Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by cjbgkagh 1116 days ago
No I’m not. I actually consider it a preferable outcome to the alternative which is a great powers conflict (WWIII) that would generate untold, potentially nuclear, destruction. If I found out the US did this I would breathe a sigh of relief and I’m sure I’m not the only one. So long as China thinks they have a realistic chance of dethroning the US they’ll take that chance. If the US fails to secure a Russian defeat in Ukraine that’ll only embolden China further. Ideally I’d prefer for the US to fix its own problems and retake its seat as the undisputed economic and moral arbiter of the world but I don’t think that is likely. My biggest worry is that the US believes its own missile shield hype and picks a nuclear fight that the US then loses (hint; everyone loses).
1 comments
MichaelZuo 1116 days ago
Why would any other country care about the US 'being dethroned' after '250 tons worth of mini nukes' have been launched into orbit?

After such an extreme violation of norms there likely won't be anyone providing support.

link
cjbgkagh 1116 days ago
Not sure if I understand your statement. A deployment of a new unstoppable super weapon would be an entrenchment of power not a dethronement.

Norms are violated all the time to very little consequence, sure, this would be on a whole other level but what could you do… what could anyone do… and that’s the point. I think people are over optimistic about the potential for collective action. I’m not the person who needs convincing that it’s a bad idea, that decision maker, if they even exist, is in the US government somewhere.

link
MichaelZuo 1116 days ago
A "new unstoppable super weapon"?

This is bizarrely confused, in fact such a system has been studied since the 60s, and briefly partially implemented: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractional_Orbital_Bombardment...

It has too many downsides to make sense to deploy.

The only scenario where it can do anything meaningful is if it's immediately used, then MAD would apply just the same.

I can't parse the rest of the comment, so read up on the historical background if your as confused as it seems.

link