What's new

How catastrophic will an Indo-Pak nuclear armageddon be?

Indo-guy

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Aug 14, 2013
Messages
4,820
Reaction score
2
Country
India
Location
Singapore
How catastrophic will an Indo-Pak nuclear armageddon be? - Rediff.com News

A nuclear war between India and Pakistan would result in a global famine that could kill over two billion people -- a quarter of the world's population -- and end human civilisation, a study warned on Tuesday.
"A nuclear war using only a fraction of existing arsenals would produce massive casualties on a global scale -- far more than we had previously believed," said Ira Helfand, the study's author and co-president of the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War.
In a previous study in 2012, the Nobel Peace Prize-winning IPPNW and Physicians for Social Responsibility said that a nuclear famine could kill more than a billion people.
The new study 'Nuclear Famine: Two Billion People at Risk?’ is based upon research published by climate scientists who have assessed the impact of nuclear explosions on the Earth's atmosphere and other ecosystems.
According to the study, a nuclear war using as few as 100 weapons anywhere in the world would disrupt the global climate and agricultural production so severely that the lives of more than two billion people would be in jeopardy

"A billion people dead in the developing world is obviously a catastrophe unparallelled in human history. But then if you add to that the possibility of another 1.3 billion people in China being at risk, we are entering something that is clearly the end of civilisation," Helfand said.
"Chinese winter wheat production would fall 50 per cent in the first year and, averaged over the entire decade after the war, would be 31 per cent below baseline," it said.
"The prospect of a decade of widespread hunger and intense social and economic instability in the world's largest country has immense implications for the entire global community, as does the possibility that the huge declines in Chinese wheat production will be matched by similar declines in other wheat producing countries," Helfand said.

He said the study looked at India and Pakistan as the two sides have fought three full-fledged wars since 1947.

But the author also said that the earth would expect a similar impact from any limited nuclear war. Modern atomic weapons are far more powerful than the US bombs that killed more than 200,000 people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945.

"Countries around the world -- those who are nuclear-armed and those who are not -- must work together to eliminate the threat and consequences of nuclear war," Helfand said.
"In order to eliminate this threat, we must eliminate nuclear weapons," he added.
 
Last edited:
a
How catastrophic will an Indo-Pak nuclear armageddon be? - Rediff.com News

A nuclear war between India and Pakistan would result in a global famine that could kill over two billion people -- a quarter of the world's population -- and end human civilisation, a study warned on Tuesday.
"A nuclear war using only a fraction of existing arsenals would produce massive casualties on a global scale -- far more than we had previously believed," said Ira Helfand, the study's author and co-president of the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War.
In a previous study in 2012, the Nobel Peace Prize-winning IPPNW and Physicians for Social Responsibility said that a nuclear famine could kill more than a billion people.
The new study 'Nuclear Famine: Two Billion People at Risk?’ is based upon research published by climate scientists who have assessed the impact of nuclear explosions on the Earth's atmosphere and other ecosystems.
According to the study, a nuclear war using as few as 100 weapons anywhere in the world would disrupt the global climate and agricultural production so severely that the lives of more than two billion people would be in jeopardy

"A billion people dead in the developing world is obviously a catastrophe unparallelled in human history. But then if you add to that the possibility of another 1.3 billion people in China being at risk, we are entering something that is clearly the end of civilisation," Helfand said.
"Chinese winter wheat production would fall 50 per cent in the first year and, averaged over the entire decade after the war, would be 31 per cent below baseline," it said.
"The prospect of a decade of widespread hunger and intense social and economic instability in the world's largest country has immense implications for the entire global community, as does the possibility that the huge declines in Chinese wheat production will be matched by similar declines in other wheat producing countries," Helfand said.

He said the study looked at India and Pakistan as the two sides have fought three full-fledged wars since 1947.

But the author also said that the earth would expect a similar impact from any limited nuclear war. Modern atomic weapons are far more powerful than the US bombs that killed more than 200,000 people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945.

"Countries around the world -- those who are nuclear-armed and those who are not -- must work together to eliminate the threat and consequences of nuclear war," Helfand said.
"In order to eliminate this threat, we must eliminate nuclear weapons," he added.
all right then, lets fight full scale conventional war with pakistan.
 
How catastrophic will an Indo-Pak nuclear armageddon be? - Rediff.com News

A nuclear war between India and Pakistan would result in a global famine that could kill over two billion people -- a quarter of the world's population -- and end human civilisation, a study warned on Tuesday.
"A nuclear war using only a fraction of existing arsenals would produce massive casualties on a global scale -- far more than we had previously believed," said Ira Helfand, the study's author and co-president of the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War.
In a previous study in 2012, the Nobel Peace Prize-winning IPPNW and Physicians for Social Responsibility said that a nuclear famine could kill more than a billion people.
The new study 'Nuclear Famine: Two Billion People at Risk?’ is based upon research published by climate scientists who have assessed the impact of nuclear explosions on the Earth's atmosphere and other ecosystems.
According to the study, a nuclear war using as few as 100 weapons anywhere in the world would disrupt the global climate and agricultural production so severely that the lives of more than two billion people would be in jeopardy

"A billion people dead in the developing world is obviously a catastrophe unparallelled in human history. But then if you add to that the possibility of another 1.3 billion people in China being at risk, we are entering something that is clearly the end of civilisation," Helfand said.
"Chinese winter wheat production would fall 50 per cent in the first year and, averaged over the entire decade after the war, would be 31 per cent below baseline," it said.
"The prospect of a decade of widespread hunger and intense social and economic instability in the world's largest country has immense implications for the entire global community, as does the possibility that the huge declines in Chinese wheat production will be matched by similar declines in other wheat producing countries," Helfand said.

He said the study looked at India and Pakistan as the two sides have fought three full-fledged wars since 1947.

But the author also said that the earth would expect a similar impact from any limited nuclear war. Modern atomic weapons are far more powerful than the US bombs that killed more than 200,000 people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945.

"Countries around the world -- those who are nuclear-armed and those who are not -- must work together to eliminate the threat and consequences of nuclear war," Helfand said.
"In order to eliminate this threat, we must eliminate nuclear weapons," he added.




Not another India Pakistan thread again :pissed:


This is not about India and Pakistan .....this is about whole world !

will you care to read before you express your opinion ?
 




This is not about India and Pakistan .....this is about whole world !

will you care to read before you express your opinion ?

I read it please don't take it personally it does concern the world but its still about India and Pakistan nonetheless and i just expressed my opinion why bother to take it seriously if you are always in the right and others aren't. It has been discussed before thats why i said what i did.
 
This is exxagerated so grossly it's not even funny.
Borders the old Asian delusions that they are center of the world and if they nuke each other civilization will magically cease to exist.
 
I read it please don't take it personally it does concern the world but its still about India and Pakistan nonetheless and i just expressed my opinion why bother to take it seriously if you are always in the right and others aren't. It has been discussed before thats why i said what i did.


Did I say that I am always 'in the right ' ?
Do you know that this article is based on new study that was released only today ?

You do understand the I importance of this topic right ?

what is wrong if it is reiterated ?

People in India and Pakistan and all around the globe need to read this and think about it ....

This is exxagerated so grossly it's not even funny.
Borders the old Asian delusions that they are center of the world and if they nuke each other civilization will magically cease to exist.


You are stupid enough not to understand that this reports comes from an international agency and not some Asian agency suffering from Asian delusion ...???
 
Last edited:
Did I say that I am always 'in the right ' ?
Do you know that this article is based on new study that was released only today ?

You do understand the I importance of this topic right ?

what is wrong if it is reiterated ?

People in India and Pakistan and all around the globe need to read this and think about it ....

No you didn't say that but you implied that by suggesting that i must not have read it. By the way i do understand the importance of the topic because i have had discussions on it with a few members.
 
total destruction of this side of earth...eventually destroying the whole planet
 
New report from IPPNW: two billion at risk from nuclear famine
December 10, 2013


New report from IPPNW: two billion at risk from nuclear famine | IPPNW peace and health blog
International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW) and its US affiliate Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR) today released a new report concluding that more than two billion people—a quarter of the world’s population—would be at risk of starvation in the event of a limited nuclear exchange, such as one that could occur between India and Pakistan, or by the use of even a small number of the nuclear weapons held by the US and Russia.
A nuclear war using only a fraction of existing arsenals would produce massive casualties on a global scale—far more than we had previously believed,” said the report’s author, IPPNW co-president Ira Helfand.
Nuclear Famine: Two Billion People at Risk? updates a study originally written by Dr. Helfand in 2012. Like the previous edition, the report released today is based upon research published by climate scientists who have assessed the impact of nuclear explosions on the Earth’s atmosphere and other ecosystems.
The report comes as momentum builds internationally to reframe disarmament efforts around a renewed understanding of the humanitarian impact of nuclear weapons. In October, 125 nations issued a joint statement at the UN calling for the abolition of nuclear weapons as a humanitarian imperative. Next February, more than 100 nations will convene in Mexico to discuss the humanitarian consequences posed by nuclear war and the need to act on that knowledge.
“Countries around the world—those who are nuclear-armed and those who are not—must work together to eliminate the threat and consequences of nuclear war,” Dr. Helfand said. “In order to eliminate this threat, we must eliminate nuclear weapons.”
Former President of the Soviet Union Mikhail Gorbachev said in 2012 that the climate impacts of the use of nuclear weapons underscore that, “we must discard Cold War-style plans for the possible use of these weapons and move rapidly to eliminating them from the world’s arsenals.”
ICAN—the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons—was launched by IPPNW in 2007 and now comprises more than 300 partner organizations in 80 countries campaigning for a treaty to ban nuclear weapons and to mandate their elimination. The report published today lends added weight to ICAN’s call to convene negotiations on such a treaty without further delay.
 
You are stupid enough not to understand that this reports comes from an international agency and not some Asian agency suffering from Asian delusion ....do you understand you Asia-phobic moron ???

International agencies can be wrong. And this surely is the case this time, because the claim civilization will end if there is nuclear war between two of the smallest possesors of nuclear weapons is so proposterous it could only come to the light of day having a specific agenda behind it, probably the research financiers were Asian/Indian.

But then again, i don't expect you to understand any of this.
 
Not another India Pakistan thread again :pissed:
perfect thread I was waiting for this ; watch how cyber warriors blow themselves into smithereens :cheers:
a

all right then, lets fight full scale conventional war with pakistan.
A full scale war will not remain conventional
How catastrophic will an Indo-Pak nuclear armageddon be? - Rediff.com News

A nuclear war between India and Pakistan would result in a global famine that could kill over two billion people -- a quarter of the world's population -- and end human civilisation, a study warned on Tuesday.
"A nuclear war using only a fraction of existing arsenals would produce massive casualties on a global scale -- far more than we had previously believed," said Ira Helfand, the study's author and co-president of the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War.
In a previous study in 2012, the Nobel Peace Prize-winning IPPNW and Physicians for Social Responsibility said that a nuclear famine could kill more than a billion people.
The new study 'Nuclear Famine: Two Billion People at Risk?’ is based upon research published by climate scientists who have assessed the impact of nuclear explosions on the Earth's atmosphere and other ecosystems.
According to the study, a nuclear war using as few as 100 weapons anywhere in the world would disrupt the global climate and agricultural production so severely that the lives of more than two billion people would be in jeopardy

"A billion people dead in the developing world is obviously a catastrophe unparallelled in human history. But then if you add to that the possibility of another 1.3 billion people in China being at risk, we are entering something that is clearly the end of civilisation," Helfand said.
"Chinese winter wheat production would fall 50 per cent in the first year and, averaged over the entire decade after the war, would be 31 per cent below baseline," it said.
"The prospect of a decade of widespread hunger and intense social and economic instability in the world's largest country has immense implications for the entire global community, as does the possibility that the huge declines in Chinese wheat production will be matched by similar declines in other wheat producing countries," Helfand said.

He said the study looked at India and Pakistan as the two sides have fought three full-fledged wars since 1947.

But the author also said that the earth would expect a similar impact from any limited nuclear war. Modern atomic weapons are far more powerful than the US bombs that killed more than 200,000 people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945.
There are a few exaggerations here.
And the claim in the bold part involves physics of a nuclear detonation which cannot be summarised in such a gross statement.
I mean there are ways to detonate a nuclear bomb so the blast effects are maximum and the fallout minimum.
"Countries around the world -- those who are nuclear-armed and those who are not -- must work together to eliminate the threat and consequences of nuclear war," Helfand said.
Agreed
"In order to eliminate this threat, we must eliminate nuclear weapons," he added.
Easier said than done
 
Last edited:
International agencies can be wrong. And this surely is the case this time, because the claim civilization will end if there is nuclear war between two of the smallest possesors of nuclear weapons is so proposterous it could only come to the light of day having a specific agenda behind it, probably the research financiers were Asian/Indian.

But then again, i don't expect you to understand any of this.

Indeed International agencies can be wrong ...and there may be some rhetoric in the statements they make nevertheless implications are too grave and stakes too high ....

Isn't it good enough that India are Pakistan will be forced back to stone age ?

Well such an eventuality may or may not wipe out humanity ....but it will surely leave whole world crippled ?

all this study is talking about cascade effects on global climate and resultant indirect damage any such nuclear exchange will bring about .

This is a study by international body of medical professionals ....what possibly can be vested interest in any such study by any such body ???

perfect thread I was waiting for this ; watch how cyber warriors blow themselves into smithereens :cheers:

A full scale war will not remain conventional

There are a few exaggerations here.
And the claim in the bold part involves physics of a nuclear detonation which cannot be summarised in such a gross statement.
I mean there are ways to detonate a nuclear bomb so the blast effects are maximum and the fallout minimum.

Agreed :enjoy:

Easier said than done

Are you a mathematician ? Physicist ? Nuclear expert ?
Their claims are based on a study ...what is the basis of your claims that these are mere exaggerations ???
They are talking of indirect results of nuclear exchange ....which is not directly dependent upon blast radius , fall out zone etc ....
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom