World News

32318 readers

918 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

153

China urges largest nuclear states to negotiate a 'no-first-use' treaty (www.reuters.com)

submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

46 comments fedilink hide all child comments

"Nuclear-weapon states should negotiate and conclude a treaty on no-first-use of nuclear weapons against each other or make a political statement in this regard," Sun said.

China and India are currently the only two nuclear powers to formally maintain a no first use policy. Russia and the United States have the world's biggest nuclear arsenals.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 37 points 8 months ago (2 children)

The French will never agree.

Their stance has always been, if France is threatened we will use every weapon in our arsenal.

They do not have end the world stocks of nukes like the US or Russia so their attitude is, "Fuck with us and we will end you."

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

How so, that is exactly inline with "no first use".

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

How could "we will use every weapon in our arsenal" possibly be interpreted to mean "no first use"?

Nuclear weapons would not just be used to respond to nuclear threats, if that's your assumption.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

They do not have end the world stocks

I think you overestimate how many nukes it would take to cause the end of the world. Unless you mean "every piece of land is a radioactive wasteland" end of the world.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

If just India and Pakistan were to go to nuclear war with each other, in their small localized region of the world, 27 million people would die from the carnage. The resulting nuclear Autumn would be enough to change agriculture and starve 250 million people worldwide.

Kurzgesagt Video with timestamp: https://youtu.be/LrIRuqr_Ozg?si=Nn6YuO0llyB-B6If&t=380

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago

Seems like incredibly low totals.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

https://piped.video/LrIRuqr_Ozg?si=Nn6YuO0llyB-B6If&t=380

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

It's says an error about watch lists for me. Try yewtu.be instead

[–] [email protected] 15 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Radioactive contamination is basically a non concern. Potential massive climatic effects and logistics collapse on the other hand, are.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Yes, France has enough nukes to cause a nuclear winter several times over. And yes, while radioactivity levels drop rapidly, I meant it in the context of "every single piece of land is nuked and turned into a radioactive wasteland where you wouldnt want to be. Which is a concern because who wants to glow in the dark, right?".

Not sure France has enough nukes to literally hit every square inch of the planet in one go.