| > UN chief has been stating that the risk of nuclear warfare is at the highest point in decades Would love to see how they're calculating this. I'd agree we're at post-Cold War high in terms of risk of nuclear war. But that's because we have more nuclear states than before [1]. I'm sceptical we're worse off than the early 1990s, when the Soviet Union was collapsing and former Communist officials were busy staging coups and whatnot. I'm also sceptical that Russia and America are at greater risk of nuclear war than during e.g. the collapse of Yugoslavia or the Syrian civil war. > Historically the risk has been highest during periods of geopolitical tension Sure. Though it's difficult to argue anything about nuclear use historically given they've only been used in one campaign, the Cold War was a strategic nuclear stalemate, and the post-Cold War era doesn't particularly sustain your hypothesis. (Pyongyang and Pakistan being particularly-potent wildcards.) For the sake of argument, however, let's assume you're right. Are you claiming Donald Trump wasn't a source of geopolitical tension? The Trump who continued our occupation of Afghanistan, boosted troops in Iraq and Syria, offed an Iranian major general and seriously weighed leaving NATO? All while launching a multi-pronged salvo at China? This isn't a Trump v Biden or Harris thing. It's just the reality of a superpower expressing its geopolitical interests. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_with_nuclear_we... |