On Deterrence

On Deterrence is a documentary that presents a contemporary dialogue involving different viewpoints about the evolution of nuclear weapon deterrence since World War II and how deterrence may evolve in the future. The intent of this film is not to advocate any one viewpoint, but to make a lasting contribution to the history of deterrence and to the long-term dialogue about the role of U.S. nuclear weapons as a deterrent.
The film features interviews from more than 30 experts, including: National Nuclear Security Administration head Gen. Frank Klotz; Ploughshares Fund president Joseph Cirincione; former U.S. senators Sam Nunn of Georgia and Jon Kyl of Arizona; Carnegie Endowment for International Peace senior associates Ashley Tellis and James Acton; former secretaries of defense James Schlesinger, Robert Gates and William Perry; former Los Alamos National Laboratory director Sig Hecker; Stanford University senior fellow Scott Sagan; and Rose Gottemoeller, former under secretary for Arms Control and International Security at the State Department.
Learn more: share-ng.sandia.gov/news/reso....
SAND2016-10017 V
Copyright 2016 Sandia Corporation. Under the terms of Contract DE-AC04-94AL85000, there is a non-exclusive license for use of this work by or on behalf of the U.S. Government. Export of this data may require a license from the United States Government.

[@petec9686]

The Indian guy at the end of this video nails it. An end to Nuclear weapons would ensure wide scale conventional warfare. We have not had WWIII for one simple reason. Nuclear weapons make it unwinnable. And for anyone that thinks giving up nukes is a good idea, ask the only country I know of that did it, how it’s working out for them.

[@angeldavis3359]

@petec9686 I agree with you but what county are you talking about? Ukraine? There are quite a few countries that have abstained from nuclear weapons South Africa and Canada being 2 of them. I think Australia too. I'm just curious what country you were thinking of. I'm assuming Ukraine considering current affairs but just wanted some clarification in case I'm missing something. It is 4am so it's very possible I am missing something.😂🙂🙂

[@petec9686]

@@angeldavis3359 there are certainly are countries that have the ability to develop nukes but have not, but there’s just one country that I know of who had them and chose to give them up.

[@angeldavis3359]

@@petec9686 Ukraine right?

[@petec9686]

@@angeldavis3359 right.

[@angeldavis3359]

@@petec9686 I know South Africa did. I googled it to make sure😂😂😂 there were 3 other countries all in the Soviet area including Ukraine and Belarus. Can't pronounce spell or remember the other😂. I just don't understand the mentality of giving them up. I could understand kind of (not really) Sweden doing it because they are neutral but in the end you have to be able to protect yourself and your citizens. Makes zero sense. Each to their own I guess 🤷🤷😇

[@timmotel5804]

Excellent. This documentary answered some questions that I have had, past and present. I was born in 1952 and I lived through much of the cold war. Thank you.

[@Walter-Montalvo]

A great deep thanks to Sandia for producing and releasing this thought provoking discussion. Quite thrilling to see so many of the brightest minds around deterrence.

[@ryanreedgibson]

I wish Americans enjoyed this type of content more that conspiracy stories. It's factual and informative.

[@MitzvosGolem1]

Logical effective undeniable.. I am proud to have worked for DOE on these systems and retired. Today it's more about economic wars..

[@NuclearWatch]

Very good wide-ranging documentary about nuclear posture through the decades, especially the present situations. Multiple interviews cut together; long, but not a minute wasted. Schools should use it.

[@leecarney4373]

I don't think you understand KZbin Comments mate, this isn't the place to make sensible comments about what you just watched, but to share your crank conspiracy theories about how the video shows how the UN and Bill Gates are coming together to make the entirety of humanity into slaves :)

[@Awesomes007]

I’d love to be as well spoken as these people. If I were being interviewed, I’d say profound and succinct statements like, “Nuclear weapons… go boom. Big boom. Then tears.”

[@barkya]

Appreciation from all my heart for such a well made documentary. We need such enlightening views and discussions in the age of pathetically sensational news media

[@Beantastrophe]

There is no deterring someone who wants to drag the world down with them.

[@socrates218]

Let’s hope that isn’t Putin when he loses in Ukraine. I worry he wants a “no man’s land” between Russia and the rest of Europe in the event of defeat.

[@arun-it9gr]

I don't think such a man would be allowed to become that powerful.. there is enough dark arts for both sides, enough rationality that they will sit together and hammer out a compromise

[@DickCarlson-kr3ic]

Hmm has anyone told our current leader ? Seems oblivious to me

[@epasko5713]

The "wedding ring" Analogy by Ms. Bunn @ 42:40 has got to be the absolute best summary of the geopolitical side of topic of this show

[@eddievhfan1984]

Note for anyone who wants to adjust the captions, the ambiguous word at c. 5:10 is "Westphalian", referring to the Treaty of Westphalia, an European peace treaty in 1648 that laid out principles of stave sovereignty and non-interference in domestic affairs that significantly influenced diplomatic thinking into the 20th century.

[@SandiaLabs]

Thanks for catching that, Kyle! The caption should be correct now.

[@eamonwright7488]

Pickled Herring?!

[@koba_Lyle]

You could call MAD a 32 Trillion dollar wedding ring. I hope not to offend anyone but to be honest I find an incredible beauty in the Mutually Assured Destruction policy. There is so much more conclusive logical and communicative nature behind the policy than the general public seems to understand.

[@tlamn1905]

2:00 in and Schelling appears!!! AWESOME! Hope they show clips from Brodie! Thank you so much for the upload! Cannot wait to watch this!!!

[@whtbobwntsbobget]

I thought the exact same thing lol

[@clandeszipp4564]

Can we all appreciate the cool soundtrack of this documentary?

[@mididoctors]

Very Errol Morris Phillip glass fog of war clone

[@davidkoegel3148]

Looking at the credits, I saw that it was mastered in 4K, yet I can't find where to find a BluRay or 4K-BluRay disc for purchase. Was this ever produced for sale or distribution? Some of the restoration of nuclear weapons test was phenomenal!

[@lawrencekolar6273]

Happy 😃 hhhh hi jhbb look l oh

[@sssssssssss440]

Informative, thought provoking, and nonpartisan. Thank you.

[@JG-mp5nb]

A well researched, carefully thought out analysis of the development of deterrence. Kudos!

[@greigs9384]

And hello 2022 …

[@LoomingShadows]

44:10 Incredible seeing him make such a good prediction

[@youtubecomenter3655]

I like John Mearsheimer a lot. Smart guy.

[@lonasimpresasmonterrey7599]

AWESOME

[@thomass4471]

Not so sure about the description of the Tumbler shot at 1:17:00. The explosion shows rope tricks which come from the vaporization of the guy wires holding a shot tower straight. The drop on that date 5/1/52 was a airdrop though.

[@bobbydocker2102]

Can't possibly see rope tricks..

[@Thomas..Anderson]

Actually, those are trails from sounding rockets.Those trails are used to estimate blast effects.

[@lerkzor]

@@Thomas..Anderson Yep, glad you found that out, I was going to let you know. Proper respect for coming back and correcting yourself.

[@aether5213]

Top Notch documentary.

[@gunnarkaestle]

0:38 "security of our friends and allies" - so friends and allies are not the same? Is it better to be a friend or an ally? Do allies have a contractual agreement and friends share a common set of values, or what is the difference?

[@prof2yousmithe444]

The genie is out of the bottle. You cannot live in a world without nuclear weapons. Not in the foreseeable several lifetimes.

[@derekwall200]

nuclear weapons even though there is no place in the battlefield will be in our arsenals long after i am gone, and i am just 30 yrs old. so until a better weapon system is developed that can replace nukes all together were stuck with these useless radioactive paperweights

[@kloschuessel773]

Derek Wall a weapon that gives you immunity from other powers isnt useless. Even tho you cant use it. Most militaries remain unused, most weapons are replaced without ever seeing combat. They all serve as deterence

[@bobthebomb1596]

Excellent and thought provoking documentary,

[@gunnarkaestle]

Interesting piece, especially when you consider what was not talked about. What's with the nuclear power of Israel?

[@Walter-Montalvo]

@@gunnarkaestle it is the policy of Israel to not be the first to introduce nuclear weapons in the Middle East. Very clever and opaque, and a statement USA does not want to challenge, I can imagine for many reasons and catering to many actors

[@gunnarkaestle]

@@Walter-Montalvo "not be the first to *introduce* nuclear weapons in the Middle East" If you define "to introduce = to admit that they have nuclear warheads" then this statement is true. Didn't South Africa also had ambitions to develop a nuclear arsenal?

[@davidsleith7222]

great trip down memory lane, ty for sharing.

[@Blackrain4xmas]

Outstanding conversation and discussion regarding nuclear weapons today. I used to fall into the nuke em till they glow then shoot em in the dark category-politely described in the video as a Truman/Eisenhower/Pakistani military tool primarily. However, as JFK described to the UN, I now believe in the nuclear sword of Damocles that hangs over us all-ready to be cut by accident, miscalculation, or madness. I also believe that the idea of deterrence is based-as stated in the video-on will. The US Army War College talks about war as a political means to a political end where the formula of capability+will=power of resistance or offense. While all American wars have been strongly opposed until fought, in the post-Vietnam era opposition to war by the American people has always led to cessation of conflicts through less than decisive victory/success. Even Desert Storm had to be ended asap lest the world and the American people lose will to fight longer. Iraq and Afghanistan are prime examples of the US govt can wage war, but only to a limited degree because of the lack of American will. The idea of winning a war in Afghanistan with 30,000, or 10,000 troops is pathetic in comparison to the US will demonstrated in previous wars. The American military cannot be defeated by enemies, but it is controlled by a govt that derives its power from the consent or will of the people who have no will for war. Without will, there is no deterrence, and one need look no further than Iran's unabated pursuit of nuclear weapons or North Korea's development of nukes, or Russia's invasions of Georgia, Crimea, and Ukraine. The US nuclear arsenal doesn't deter anyone anymore because no other country believes that the American people have the will to use nukes other than in direct response to an attack on NYC, DC, LA, Phoenix, etc. Put another way, voters in Youngstown, Ohio are no longer easily convinced that getting nuked by Russia is worth threatening Russia over Sevastapol, and the Russians know it so they're not deterred. People in a trailer park outside Yuma, AZ are not going to cheer if Pyongyang is nuked after they fire some artillery at a ship in the Sea of Japan. The video shows a fantastic shot of Eisenhower's inuguration where nuclear missiles are paraded in front of him on parade, and the crowd cheered. Today, if giant Minuteman III missile were dragged down a parade in front of President Obama or Trump or Hillary Clinton or whoever.... ...the crowd would fall silent. The age of the US successfully deterring others with nukes or even with conventional military action, are ending. The American people are too tired of war to support a war. They'd rather just declared it as "ended" and leave it to inertia

[@boeingdriver29]

Blackrain4xmas I agree with all of your statement with the exception of Iran’s unabated desire for nuclear weapons. This is demonstrably incorrect and is pure U.S. and Israeli propaganda.

[@mr.iforgot3062]

I think Mexico has the best food you guys. I like a good decaffeinated coffee in the evening. You understand. Thanks for being my friend

[@mr.iforgot3062]

Do you fellas like country music? I don't. I enjoy Mexican music. It sounds like circus music. I'm not from Mexico. No no. I'm from Antarctica. Born and raised!

[@rd264]

"inertia"? I think your attempt to generalize about what Americans believe or want re defense is questionable or over reaching, but I would agree that Americans do not support whats been foisted on them by the far right national security Establishment --- Empire and the new Cold War.

[@louisvarre2197]

It’s interesting that most of the people giving interviews saying Deterrence didn’t work, rigorously supported it or the politicians/policies/industry.

[@Skoko-oh2fz]

Did we have an atomic war ?

[@kollusion1]

It's an industry, nothing else. I think after drugs, the arms industry is the most lucrative. No one's going to say that their against it, or that it needs re-examing. Money, money, money.

[@PORRRIDGE_GUN]

@@Skoko-oh2fz No. But that was because too much money was being made by the MIC

[@stephenjenkins7971]

@@kollusion1 Nether the arms or the drug industry are comparatively that wealthy in the US. The movie and tv industry blows both out of the water by a massive margin, for example.

[@sartainja]

Excellent documentary. Sad that more people are not interested in this subject.

[@lorentzinvariant7348]

I once was completely on the other side but as I have grown older and accumulated life experience, I have come to believe Edward Teller was right all along.

[@gunnarkaestle]

1:18:00 "How careful we are and how we deal with the North Koreans" - True. I have heard the North Korean would rather eat grass (again - sic!) instead of giving the nuclear weapons back.

[@salvadorvizcarra769]

Correct. Your comment is well founded. But, only part of the truth is always told, making US the good part, and the rest the bad side or the Axis of Evil. The raw truth is that the US is the enemy of the whole world and not Koreans. Check out these FACTS that are on the Web: In 250 years of existence as a nation, the US has fought against 29 sovereign countries. We have "grown" 711 times the size of our territory from the original 13 colonies. We have provoked with total impunity, assassinations of government leaders, Coups d'État and Economic Blockades in 6 UN member nations. (Between 1947 and 1989, the US tried to change other nations’ governments 73 times. It includes 66 covert operations and 7 overt ones.) We have almost 800 Military Bases scattered around the world; 13 of which are against China. On the other hand, China and Korea (The "Axis of Evil" of our times), in 2,000 years of history have NEVER invaded anyone. These nations have fought their Civil Wars, defended themselves against foreign invasions, and secured their immediate borders, but they have never been meddling or aggressor countries. Do you know how many Military Bases China or Korea have outside their territory? None. Zero. Any. NADA! They do not have a single Base. These are verifiable facts. Neither China nor Korea will invade the world; We do... that's DONE, as we do in the Middle East. Iran also does not have a SINGLE MILITARY BASE outside its national territory, and it is surrounded by 16 US Bases, and it is we who call the Iranians Terrorists. "War is a Business" Wars are made by Bankers. US is a BIG BANK, disguised as a country.

[@8ersoul8]

When the words that come out our mouths ...... Are in Truth. Respect can become understood .... To play the game delays only the inevitable.

[@Walter-Montalvo]

What I hear is either you have nuclear weapons or not. How about an agreement where countries can have the minimum number of weapons for deterrence but not enough for an obliterating strike? That would provide stability through deterrence without risk of escalation.

[@6688ya]

You have a good point the problem is that there are too many psychopath in position of power the u.s. Is not exempt, I would say the United state will do whatever necessary to keep hegemony around the world , and now the u.s is not the only one with nuclear weapons

[@garywatson]

Some very accurate predictions about Ukraine starting at 44:00

[@IAMschizoaffective]

Better to take it in tack?

[@jimczerwinski4951]

So true. You can’t deal with a maniac !

[@garykemple1827]

Unique Charismatic mad man at large.

[@timthompson468]

Great video. That was a bit of a false dichotomy at the end by Sen. Nunn.

[@stephenverchinski409]

Just to try and use the overbuilt weapons complex leftovers requires a MOX fuel plant. Last one built cost $130 billion dollars. That does not include plants costing in the Billions and decommissioning in the Billions and waste disposal in the Billions.

[@gunnarkaestle]

You mean the Rocky Flats Plant? How much did this cost to clean up?

[@generaljackripper666]

I think Russia also understands what it's like to be invaded by a hostile power, and that also might cause a rather visceral reaction from them. The trouble with attempting to understand things like deterrence, is you have to acknowledge the fact the other side also gets a vote.

[@rrasin1]

Everything based off fear and paranoia, two great emotions to base nuclear warfare policy off.

[@MitzvosGolem1]

Fact : SSNBS full of these devices exists on both sides pointed at each other is not "irrational fear"...

[@killingmasheen]

Wouldn't it make more sense to detonate warheads in the upper atmosphere over enemy territory to destroy their outgoing missiles? It takes 30 minutes for an intercontinental missile to travel half way around the world to reach it's target while SLBMs can reach their targets in as little as 5 minutes. Soviet AMB (and Russian) was designed to intercept incoming warheads on reentry (a fool's errand) which if applied in reverse would be far more effective as missiles by comparison are fragile and easily disturbed by shifting aerodynamic conditions from the point of launch to ~100,000 feet. I know I can't be the only one who's thought of this, anyone know of any research done into this concept?

[@robinwells8879]

Sadly un-inventing something can't be done so there will always be a need for the weapons. As for terrorists, they are always supported by states be it Pakistan, Iran, Korean or Saudi Arabia. They can be kindly asked to desist and if they don't... North Korea has one major city where the elite live. One boom and you have regime change! Like it or loath it, deterrence is proven to work. A properly fine documentary.

[@GiantSandles]

The fact that you would seriously contemplate attacking North Korea despite them being a nuclear armed state kind of proves the opposite lol

[@skymaster4743]

The US has always topped the list in funding and training terrorist groups be it Contras in Nicaragua, UNITA in Angola, MEK/Jundullah in Iran, Al Nusra and affiliates in Syria.

[@TruckingToPlease]

Uranium pit production needs to ramp up drastically to replenish our fading surplus.

[@impv1se]

the bit on Ukraine is scary accurate

[@GeneralJackRipper]

So far, nuclear deterrence seems to be working quite well.

[@thelastdruidofscotland]

until that one moment someone loses thier cool.

[@ronniecochran8366]

But you don't know if it has worked. Because until it does not work you are assuming it's working fine

[@mididoctors]

Has not deterred war. It's odd we still fight conventional war? Why didn't the UK threaten Argentina with nuclear destruction over the Falklands?

[@henryeberhardt3012]

Until a mad man comes to power!!!!!!!

[@GeneralJackRipper]

@@mididoctors You really want to trade nukes over a small island in the south atlantic? Good thing people like you are not in charge. Thankfully the British were confident that even their poorly funded military could beat a third world nation.

[@user-ii2qb9pb6i]

good

[@raceace]

An excellent documentary, a great ensemble of familiar cold war political/philosophical participants. It did a good job of demonstrating the game theory behaviour that lead to somewhat predictable results in hindsight, but it would have been even move amazing if they could have had those opinions bolstered by experts in Soviet union. But for all of the genuine and rhetorical statements, When explaining "naive" how can we expect any nation threatened militarily or not, to give up nuclear weapons when in the lead is the very nation that found itself unexpectedly the world superpower at the end of world war 2 by virtue of being the first to use and retain the nuclear advantage, and via its use directly and indirectly aided their continual military and economic dominance in the world. For all the talk by the US about non-proliferation to not realise their own nuclear racism is a barrier to genuine debate and removal of Nuclear weapons. Some of the commentators alluded to the fact by admitting that having a successful nuclear program as being world changing( Positives and negatives) It must be difficult to craft a narrative for disarmament by downplaying an enlightenment when your still at the top and directly benefitting.

[@koeenr29kunhaya97]

Sunda Empire Mr. ALM.Rangga Sasana from indonesian tentang bahaya nuclear yang harus di hapuskan dari Tatanan dunia Baru. Jangan ada lagi membangun blok blokan. Karena sifat di petak petakan menuai perang. Kedamaian adalah hak sebagai bangsa. Mr.Ir.Soekarno

[@musicilike69]

Very interesting..what an awful conundrum deterrence is balancing on the tip of a knife...

[@musicilike69]

Global zero can't be done..it leaves everyone then vulnerable to a mad man who's country secretly races for the bomb then threatens to use it..but holding them at the UN and a threatened country then being able to initiate defence or retaliation via a specialised body like the security council...so the global community having them but no one nation owning them...

[@lupahole]

Ha, the usual faces from old, Shlezinger and Perry. How old they got :(

[@IAMschizoaffective]

What about slaughter bots?

[@howiedewin3688]

Having nuke capabilities means your coordinates get added to a list, somewhere.

[@chekaschmeka4283]

When KNOWN. The world is more armed and mobile than most think.

[@howiedewin3688]

@@chekaschmeka4283 horseshoes & hand grenades. The population that isn't sheltered is getting sick.

[@LNMarls]

John Cena in the thumbnail for this video 😂😂

[@blip1]

The comments on Ukraine in this aged well and poorly. It's time to remind the Russians that a deterrent exists

[@AstronomicalAviation]

Is this the best documentary ever

[@maximilianoprieto1438]

Was this narrated by Rainn Wilson?

[@salvadorvizcarra769]

As serious as Cancer. But, only part of the truth is always told, making US the good part, and the rest the bad side or the Axis of Evil. The raw truth is that the US is the enemy of the whole world. Check out these FACTS that are on the Web: In 250 years of existence as a nation, the US has fought against 29 sovereign countries. We have "grown" 711 times the size of our territory from the original 13 colonies. We have provoked with total impunity, assassinations of government leaders, Coups d'État and Economic Blockades in 6 UN member nations. (Between 1947 and 1989, the US tried to change other nations’ governments 73 times. It includes 66 covert operations and 7 overt ones.) We have almost 800 Military Bases scattered around the world; 13 of which are against China. On the other hand, China and Korea (The "Axis of Evil" of our times), in 2,000 years of history have NEVER invaded anyone. These nations have fought their Civil Wars, defended themselves against foreign invasions, and secured their immediate borders, but they have never been meddling or aggressor countries. Do you know how many Military Bases China or Korea have outside their territory? None. Zero. Any. NADA! They do not have a single Base. These are verifiable facts. Neither China nor Korea will invade the world; We do... that's DONE, as we do in the Middle East. Iran also does not have a SINGLE MILITARY BASE outside its national territory, and it is surrounded by 16 US Bases, and it is we who call the Iranians Terrorists. "War is a Business" Wars are made by Bankers. US is a BIG BANK, disguised as a country.

[@thelastdruidofscotland]

how do you get rid of these bombs, simply build a weapon system that negates them, a wide beam orbital laser, or orbital bombardment using rods from god, how do you hide them, simply push your spacecraft into deep space, kinda like a sub hiding in the ocean, hard to find, we have got to the point where any earth based weaponry is extremely effective, and ram jet and stealth tech just keeps upping the ante, first strike options become viable for those smaller states, make all that redundant with a wide beam laser that can target not just bombs, but whole nations, and anything they can put into the air or sea, for pointers, look into daarp research 20 years ago, that laser program is now nearing capability level, so I am pretty sure the americans are well on thier way into an orbital shield defense grid, its the only logical step when nation after nation aspires to obtaining nuclear icbm or stealth ramjet missiles.

[@saltycreole2673]

"World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones". -Albert Einstein

[@chetmcdonald]

Smart people talking about a world gone mad. It would be nice if we all could get along and didn't need nukes. Until then we still need them.

[@FW190D9]

This rings so true today, as Putin has invaded Ukraine. Russia felt like the US were walking all over them.

[@TheOffertonhatter]

Very interesting documentary. More so today, on the anniversary of Russia invading Ukraine. The worry is, that when you get a leader of a nation with an immense stockpile of not only tactical weapons, but also those of massive destruction (1MT plus) sabre rattling, you have no option but to ensure that you have the alternative to push them back from pressing the trigger. Not having those deterrents would actually be counter productive and conventional weapons would never destroy every WMD before launch and cause unimaginable carnage. I would wonder what the alumni interviewed in the video would now say in 2023 subsequent to the invasion.

[@garykemple1827]

Howe many nuclear bombs have been detonated on earth already?

[@mudd4284]

That’s when you just stop them.

[@garykemple1827]

And I'm constant impossible to lighten up anything.

[@howardleekilby7390]

❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️

[@rodgersericv]

LOL at 2:24.

[@glens51]

1:20:00 part 3

[@cuauhtemocortiz6944]

me open mind and different things.

[@alisyed2913]

But it was India who brought it's Brahmos system out just after they lost mig 21 on 27 Feb 2019

[@stephenverchinski409]

Should have interviewed Dr. Francis A. Boyle. Omnicidal weapons. Today we have madmen.

[@u.s.militia7682]

We constantly gripe and do nothing but continue to let our government get away with whatever it wants. “We the People” deserve whatever we receive because it’s all literally our fault.

[@phcusnret]

"Nothing could be stupider"." Really? Did it work? Seems pretty smart to me.

[@jamesfatari2455]

44:20 is what were living now.

[@garykemple1827]

Hundreds of nuclear explosions¿ Why

[@generaljackripper666]

Science. Duh.

[@kevini4295]

Good documentary overall. But I take a more aggressive view vs pacifistic. The US needs to maintain and develop nuclear capabilities and not he hesitant to use them should some other state or state-sponsored terrorist use them against us. North Korea launches a nuke and takes out Guam. No, we shouldn't say "oh gee let's not escalate. One conventional bomb against their intelligence HQ will do it. No, you turn Pyongyang into charcoal. By these crazies knowing we will respond in kind is true deterrence. Unless nuclear weapons can be wiped from the face of the earth. Then true deterrence it is.

[@mimetype]

The answer is simple. Duck and cover!

[@kschuman1152]

Deterrence, extended deterrence and mutually assured destruction are ultimately unworkable strategies. They comprise an unwieldy, overly complex solution that makes many oversimplifying assumptions. At some point events in one or another of the world's many states, or miscalculation of one kind or another, will almost certainly lead to catastrophic use of nuclear weapons (and to a near approximation any use, intentional or unintentional of hydrogen bombs is a categorically horrific catastrophe). Nuclear weapons are far more than a significant threat to the survival of our species, they are an inevitable threat, the culmination of which grows closer every moment. There is probably no realistic solution to this problem. We are probably doomed. Within the next few centuries it is statistically certain that a large scale themo-nuclear war will occur, likely wiping out humanity or returning it to the stone age. The only (very remotely) possible solution is to move in the direction of a strategy of global nuclear disarmament. The initial challenge to making this shift in perspective is to recognize the absolute futility, longer term, of such currently entrenched approaches as discussed in this video. The futility is self evident and shouldn't require discussion. BTW -- actually, the problem of nuclear disarmament is much greater even than most imagine. it will be necessary to literally un-invent nuclear weapons to truly resolve it. While this may at first seem impossible, it is probably not, in principle. An effort could be made to collect every ounce of uranium above and below ground (within a mine-able distance of the surface), load it on very large cargo rockets, hundreds of thousands of them if necessary, which could all be fired at the sun. Obviously we do not have the technology to hunt down even minute quantities of the element, but it seems possible that with enough R&D, necessary detectors and sensing devices could be developed. No uranium = no plutonium = no atomic bombs = no trigger for hydrogen bombs. No nuclear fission energy tech either, but many sacrifices of great magnitude will likely be necessary to avert mankind's eventually reaping the world-wind it has created for itself. Reduction of the earths periodic table of elements by one is probably easier than terraforming an alien world. Some serious scientists consider approaches to the later, so why not the problem of expelling all uranium from the earth?

[@timmotel5804]

Humans haven't evolved enough to live in peace and harmony. Hundreds or thousands of years of evolution away, if ever...

[@pasoundman]

Wow, the French deciding to create their own nuclear deterrent wasn't a dxecision made in Washington ! Quelle surprise. I doubt that Wahington decided that the Soviets or Britain could build a nuclear deterrent either.

[@gunnarkaestle]

Maybe the Israelis asked first in Washington, what exactly they could do at Dimona.

[@mrs3188]

38:12 - 38:17 Best joke I've ever heard.

[@garykemple1827]

Lapalma has 12 vents! Snowhite had dwarfs.

[@garykemple1827]

You a master debater?

[@juliusraben3526]

33:30 well, since the soviet union stopped to exist. Its fair to say USA won cold war. In my opinion, the petrodollar is a weapon thats barely acknowledged

[@garykemple1827]

Rusty's a rooster jack.

[@joehernande-721]

He traded the missiles in Turkey that were going to be removed anymore.

[@johnwatson3948]

“Deterrence is the art of producing in the mind of the enemy the FEAR to attack… of course the whole point of a Doomsday Machine is lost if you keep it a secret! Why didn't you tell the world?”

[@johnlockton]

The BEST movie ever made!

[@garykemple1827]

A man who talks to himself can not be philoshifying.

[@TheDane_BurnAllCopies]

42:55 …and Denmark. As one of the founding members of NATO we are in a b**ch of a place between Russia and England…

[@prun8893]

2:54 Said perfectly. Remember this when a politician wants to defund the military and give your money to "those who are struggling".

[@xtexasxfightx]

Looking at you, sleepy joe.

[@HoneyGlzedHam]

The flip side to that argument is that using nuclear weapons is like shooting a double barreled shotgun at your enemy with one of the barrels curved back at you.

[@HoneyGlzedHam]

@@patrickrinaldis577 I think you've missed the point. The one barrel being curved back at you was in reference to the inevitable nuclear winter that would devastate the globe as a result of even a small scale exchange. When deterrence breaks down, and madmen have the access codes, even a "survivable" first strike becomes suicide.

[@LHFX]

​@@HoneyGlzedHam Many things have been said, especially 30-40 years ago, about the so called nuclear winter associated with a small/medium nuclear exchange. None of them are true - it's pseudo-science.

[@TemplarOnHigh]

It's wrong if they have nukes. Russia or China can fight the United States on their terms in a local conventional war and we will almost certainly not reply with nuclear force. Would you nuke Moscow over Lithuania or Beijing over Taipei? Maintaining the strategic nuclear counter force isn't that expensive - maintaining the conventional capability that would likely be involved in any regional conflict before the button is pressed - that's expensive.

[@rickevans3959]

A lot of this is based on game theory as developed by Vin Neumann

[@fritzdaddy-135mmgetstagger4]

No not really

[@youtubecomenter3655]

Deterrence works both ways. Russian, Chinese, Pakistani and North Korean weapons make the world safer. Iran getting a bomb would prevent an Israeli attack. Libya should have gotten them. So should Japan.

[@youtubecomenter3655]

@paul lennon Israel would have significant nuclear primacy.

[@garykemple1827]

All his own..

[@amy-joe5772]

That's funny the U.S government lit a fuze with Hiroshima now they are trying to figure out how to control the weapons that can created

[@thomasw.glasgow7449]

it was a M . A . D . world back in the day , aye !

[@gunnarkaestle]

But I must agree that it is hard to close Pandora's Box again, after it has been opened.

[@josephhurdman5588]

I can see future historians (assuming we have a future) co-mingling WW1, WW2 & the Cold war as one single conflict - they may well refer to it as "The Great War", even...

[@joethurman8178]

Don't forget to factor in Covid-19; 20 & 21 variants, on economies worldwide...death tolls worldwide :(

[@twt3716]

These are the people who make money from death. Pure monsters.

[@robertwilliams3527]

Like there’s not sticks everywhere.

[@chrisrosenkreuz23]

"suddenly they were starving" you think they weren't before?

[@youtubecomenter3655]

It’s a known fact that the fall of Soviet Union led to immediate economic hardship and massive increase in the excess death rate. People who were dependent on government help died in vast numbers.

[@chrisrosenkreuz23]

@@youtubecomenter3655 yes that is true but my point was that they were also starving before the fall

[@kxkxkxkx]

@@chrisrosenkreuz23 you are wrong

[@PORRRIDGE_GUN]

@@chrisrosenkreuz23 No they weren't. A study done from 1984-88 by a US University, semi-covertly found that the average soviet citizen's daily calorific intake was 2800 calories. 350 calories less than the average US citizen's intake of 3150 calories. The soviets had the healthier diet, with more fibre and vegetables but had a similar intake of sugar. Also, soviet citizens took more exercise due to very low levels of car ownership compared to the US.

[@chrisrosenkreuz23]

@@PORRRIDGE_GUN yeah, I think I'll take my parents' word having lived out first hand over theirs any day of the week. Nice try though

[@garykemple1827]

10? 20? 100? 1000? What the¿ We have already had nuclear wars..