|Cold War by Taylor Callery|
I want to draw your attention to a recent article posted at War on the Rocks, entitled Three Minutes to Midnight: Closer to Nuclear Conflict Than We Think. It touches on a number of themes we've pushed hard here at FutureJacked over the last year and as mass mood continues to throw off alarm bells of negativity across the globe, these themes continue to be relevant to what you want to have on your threat board.
First, a caveat. I often find anti-nuclear articles tiresome. Not because I necessarily disagree with them, but because the tone always goes full Apocalypse and the hectoring gets old. That caveat aside, the authors of the article in question do raise some very valid points.
While at Stanford last month, we had a long conversation with former Secretary of Defense William Perry about the nuclear dangers facing the world. We were struck by his provocative and frightening outlook: that the possibility of a nuclear catastrophe today is greater than it was during the Cold War. North Korea’s recent bluster only underlines the dangers.
Perry knows whereof he speaks, since he has devoted most of his career to preventing nuclear conflict. (Full disclosure: One of us was his student and research assistant at Stanford.) His recent book, My Journey at the Nuclear Brink, explains why he focused so much on these issues, and why he concluded that nuclear weapons endanger U.S. national security far more than they preserve it.
And here is the video mentioned in the article:After our conversation with Perry, we attended a lecture that he gave on today’s nuclear dangers. It is well worth watching in its entirety, for he offered a nuanced analysis of the nuclear policies and capabilities of Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, and Pakistan. After this sweeping tour of the world, he concluded that there are three main nuclear dangers today that, taken together, make the current world even more dangerous than during most of the Cold War.
The arbitrary and politicized nature of the Doomsday Clock aside, the authors of the article make a number of points well worth pondering. One of these points, the Russian military doctrine of a "de-escalatory strike" with tactical nuclear weapons when faced with a major conventional warfare challenge was discussed in depth here back in our post on Nuclear Weapons and Social Mood and the general theme has also been continually analyzed in depth by Alan Hall in the Socionomist over the past ten years.
Please take the time to think about nuclear war. Check out Nuclear Emergencies. Do some planning similar to what we did in the Nuclear Strike of the Month series. Think about how you are positioned to deal with nuclear war - whether it is a regional conflict between India and Pakistan, or a nuclear exchange between the US and Russia.
Every day the headlines trumpet negative social mood. Whether it is Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders challenging the Establishment political edifice or the continual rumblings of Brexit - this whole negative social mood thing is not just a fun little intellectual toy. It has vast implications and you still have time to use this tool to prepare as best you can for what is coming our way.