During the Cuban missile crisis, President Kennedy estimated the odds of nuclear war as being somewhere between one out of three. For something that catastrophic, those odds are not good. Let’s not get into the detail of this crisis, other than to say that some have said that this was the closest the world has come to the unthinkable.
We could bury our heads in the sand and not think of such negative thoughts, but if we believe in humanity and would like it to continue, we must consider these unthinkable thoughts – or perish foolishly. So we ask, is nuclear war inevitable?
The world has been living under mutually assured destruction (MAD). This is a doctrine of military strategy and national security policy in which a full-scale use of nuclear weapons by two or more opposing sides would cause the complete annihilation of both the attacker and the defender. In a sane world, no one would pull the trigger. And yet the world is armed to the teeth with nukes – is this sane? There are many conflicts simmering around the world – Kashmir, Middle East, China sea, just to name a few.
Hiram Maxim, the inventor of the machine gun, declared, “Only a general who was a barbarian would send his men to certain death against the concentrated power of my new gun.” But send them they did. In World War One, the machine gun often mowed down tens of thousands of men in a single day. Orville Wright saw a similar vision: “When my brother and I built and flew the first man-carrying flying machine, we thought we were introducing into the world an invention that would make further wars practically impossible.” Far from ending war, however, the airplane increased the ability to maim and kill. In firebombing raids on London, Hamburg, and Tokyo, the airplane wrought previously unimaginable levels of destruction. In a single night, March 9, 1945, 25 percent of Tokyo was destroyed, 80,000 people were killed, and over 1 million left homeless.
Gen. Douglas MacArthur said in his 1961 address to the Philippines Congress: “You will say at once that, although the abolition of war has been the dream of man for centuries, every proposition to that end has been promptly discarded as impossible and fantastic. But that was before the science of the past decade made mass destruction a reality. The argument then was along spiritual and moral lines and lost. But now the tremendous evolution of nuclear and other potentials of destruction has suddenly taken the problem away from its primary consideration as a moral and spiritual question and brought it abreast of scientific realism.”
The point is that before the modern-day, man simply did not have the ability to destroy himself. It is different this time. So we must consider this unthinkable Biblical event.
Since we are speaking of a Biblical event, let’s get into it. A Revelations 9:18 end-time prophecy says, “A third of mankind was killed by the three plagues of fire, smoke, and sulfur …” In Mathew 24 often called the Olivet prophecy – talking about the end of the age – the Apocalypse. The prophecy is speaking of human events and not just a spiritual state of mind. Specifically, verse 22 says, “In fact, unless those days are shortened, all mankind will perish. But they will be shortened for the sake of God’s chosen people.” In other words, if God does not save man from himself, we all perish as a human race – but it does seem conditional.
But forget the Bible, let’s just look at it from a secular human perspective. Understanding human nature – one could assert that it has not fundamentally changed in millennia. We are just as bad or good as people were before – the only difference today is the technology. Man has always fought wars and will most likely continue to. Again, as said before, it is different this time, as we now have the technology to annihilate ourselves. Has the heart of men really fundamentally changed because of technology – in terms of waging war, even suicidal war? Nuclear weapons may have given pause, but throughout history, major wars have been fought every 50 to 100 years. Do you really believe that man will never again fight another world war?
Can a society turn suicidal just like individuals? Can one look at individual signs of suicide, and then applying them over a society reasonably? Consider the following from this list of individual suicidal symptoms applied to societies:
- Excessive sadness or moodiness: A population unhappy with their status in life – with a very polarized and/or extreme views over their own governance. It may then use irrational mood swings in policies and the leaders they may support.
- Hopelessness: A population that feels that society provides no hope of self-improvement no matter what they do. Often felt in the more disadvantaged socioeconomic classes.
- Sudden calmness: After christening a new leader, a sudden calmness of hope after hopelessness can occur – leading tragically back to dispair when hope is not achieved.
- Withdrawal: Societies that withdraw into apathy and/or nihilism.
- Changes in personality and/or appearance: Societies that enable extreme politics can be trigger points in the changing of strategic directions of nations. These changes, as well as fast technological developments, can leave many parts of the population venerable to nefarious politicians to take advantage of the situation – potentially installing a leader ready to take catastrophic actions based upon extreme ideologies.
- Dangerous or self-harmful behavior: Many societies may turn to more and more dangerous self-harming economic and geopolitical policies. The behaviors feature economic policies that gut the middle class and engaging in geopolitics meant to bankrupt countries and foster more war with an ever-growing military-industrial complex.
- Recent trauma or life crisis: Periods of economic, demographic, and cultural crises give society trauma. In a fiat currency central bank controlled world, where credit and currency debasement has gone exponential, it is a ticking time bomb for economic disaster.
- Making preparations: Many nations today are seeking nuclear weapons to have geopolitical autonomy. Nuclear proliferation will only increase, not decrease.
- Threatening or talking about suicide: We hear this sentiment in many of the protests going on around the world – “No Justice, No Peace.” So if a society can not have some believed justice, they are ready to go nuclear – in all senses. We see, in some cases, this mentality in many irrational leaders as well.
Can not societies become so sick that they start showing the attributes of suicidal behavior that can extend to its leaders who have control over weapons of mass destruction like nuclear weapons? Is this happening today? Even a small war may pull the trigger on the nuclear roulette wheel. One misstep or calculation could be catastrophic. Double zero (“00”) may one day hit. One quote that I have heard has stuck in my mind for years. It goes as follows:
“Man has not developed a weapon of war that he has not eventually used to its fullest extent.”
Is this haunting assertion true? Will man spin the nuclear roulette wheel again soon? It will never hit double zero (“00”). Right? This leaves us with a very sobering reality that in the next 50 years, the inevitable may happen. How severe it maybe or exact timing (perhaps just a few years) is another issue. Plan if you can accordingly. In the meantime holding on to the success of Western civilization will be paramount to holding back any nuclear war inevitability. Political decisions made today may have grave consequences for humanity tomorrow. Place your comments and bets on humanity in the comment section of this post.