Doomsday Clock moves foward!

[patriotextremeist]

WASHINGTON (Jan. 12) - The keepers of the "Doomsday Clock" plan to move its hands forward next Wednesday to reflect what they call worsening nuclear and climate threats to the world.

The symbolic clock, maintained by the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, currently is set at seven minutes to midnight, with midnight marking global catastrophe.

In a news release previewing an event next Wednesday, the group said the change was based on "worsening nuclear, climate threats" to the world.

"The major new step reflects growing concerns about a 'Second Nuclear Age' marked by grave threats, including: nuclear ambitions in Iran and North Korea , unsecured nuclear materials in Russia and elsewhere, the continuing 'launch-ready' status of 2,000 of the 25,000 nuclear weapons held by the U.S. and Russia, escalating terrorism, and new pressure from climate change for expanded civilian nuclear power that could increase proliferation risks," the release reads.

The clock was last pushed forward by two minutes to seven minutes to midnight in 2002 amid concerns about the proliferation of nuclear, biological and other weapons and the threat of terrorism.

When it was created by the magazine's staff in 1947, it was initially set at seven minutes to midnight and has moved 17 times since then.

It was as close as two minutes to midnight in 1953 following U.S. and Soviet hydrogen bomb tests, and as far away as 17 minutes to midnight in 1991 after the superpowers reached agreement on a nuclear arms reductions.

We are close to a nuclear war.

[morefngdbs]

Now if they launch 2000 nuclear bombs & all of them go off, I just bet that's going to help with global warming.
We won't see any snow for years.
YAY!

[patriotextremeist]

Ever heard of the retaliation theory? Once we launch our missiles, they will launch theirs and we will all be completely wiped out.

----> ----> <----- <----
----> ----> <---- <----
our missiles their missiles
USA Iran and North Korea

Then all 3 countries get A-bombed and everyone is dead.

Yeah, we are pretty fucked right now.

[Draconias]

At 1/14/07 11:07 AM, morefngdbs wrote: Now if they launch 2000 nuclear bombs & all of them go off, I just bet that's going to help with global warming.
We won't see any snow for years.

Actually, the exact opposite is true. Nuclear bombs cause nuclear winter. We'd see snow for TOO many years if enough nukes went off.

[patriotextremeist]

At 1/14/07 11:41 AM, Draconias wrote:
Actually, the exact opposite is true. Nuclear bombs cause nuclear winter. We'd see snow for TOO many years if enough nukes went off.

If you have no clue what Nuclear Winter is... click here.

[SyntheticTacos]

Am I the only one who thought "Clock Crew" when he read the title? I guess I know I'm a nerd now! XD

[Drah]

At 1/14/07 12:13 PM, SyntheticTacos wrote: Am I the only one who thought "Clock Crew" when he read the title? I guess I know I'm a nerd now! XD

Having never heard of it, the thought did occur to me.
But i had a feeling it was different...

Had this been the "general" forum, however.

[packow]

I don't oppose Bush for morality reasons. I oppose his administration because this shit is all their fault.

At 1/14/07 01:40 PM, packow wrote: I don't oppose Bush for morality reasons. I oppose his administration because this shit is all their fault.

Oh yea everything that goes wrong in the world is obviously bush's fault.

My girlfriend left me for my best friend! Damn that Bush!

[geforce7800GT]

At 1/14/07 01:42 PM, zeus-almighty wrote:

At 1/14/07 01:40 PM, packow wrote: I don't oppose Bush for morality reasons. I oppose his administration because this shit is all their fault.

Oh yea everything that goes wrong in the world is obviously bush's fault.

My girlfriend left me for my best friend! Damn that Bush!

Who's fault is it for turning our former allies against us, then? Who toppled Iraq's government?

[TheMason]

At 1/14/07 01:40 PM, packow wrote: I don't oppose Bush for morality reasons. I oppose his administration because this shit is all their fault.

How do you figure?

The N. Koreans broke their promises with the Clinton administration before our envoys were back in the US. Furthermore, Pyongyang is motivated more internal pressures such as keeping to population on a war footing and famines...more than they are by who lives at 1600 Penn Ave. They would've tested (if they did) whether Gore or Kerry was in the Oval Office.

Iran is an even more sticky prospect because yes the Iraq war gives seeking nukes a certain rationality. However, considering we have been at war in Iraq since 1992 and Clinton almost invaded...I think war with Iraq was inevitable even if Gore or Kerry would've won in '00 or '04. However, lumping Iraq, Iran and N. Korea together in an "axis of evil" didn't do much to help.

The USSR fell on his father's watch, not his. So how are their problems with securing their weapons and scientists W's fault?

As for Islamic terrorism bin-Laden was around way before Bush in any elected office.

I have my problems with Bush...but what I hate about people who are blindly anti-Bush like you appear to be; just blame him for everything without justifiable reasons or proof. We're suffering severe winter weather here in the mid-West. I'm sure Bush flipped a switch just to punish Missouri for electing Clair McCaskil.

[TheMason]

At 1/14/07 01:57 PM, geforce7800GT wrote: Who's fault is it for turning our former allies against us, then? Who toppled Iraq's government?

Our strongest allies are still with us:

The UK
S. Korea
Australia
Japan

If you're referring to France and Germany I suggest you look at the issue a little deeper. It is sort of like onions and ogres...it has layers. France and Germany are seeking to be the leaders of EU that can rival the US in terms of power and economic influence. Now in the late 1990s France and Germany sought to have Saddam sell oil under the UN's "Oil for Food" program in Euros rather than US dollars. Now since WWII under the Marshall plan oil is sold in US dollars; and with the removal of the gold standard as whats backing up the dollar's value oil has become what makes our dollar strong. If Iraq would've started seeling oil in Euros as Paris and Berlin wanted (Russia and China were also in on the scheme), the dollars value would've plummeted on the international money market, giving the Euro a big boost in value. When this happened Clinton considered ending the US air war against Iraq (which never really ended after the 1992 war) by invading Iraq.

So when you talk about turning our allies against us who are you talking about? Our real friends...or those who sought to attack our economy?

[TheMason]

At 1/14/07 11:00 AM, patriotextremeist wrote: We are close to a nuclear war.

I think that is being more than just a little extreme there. Who with? Iran and N. Korea are both years from being able to build an ICBM that will hit the US. And in terms of posing a threat to regional neighbors...I doubt China would launch a full-out strike on N. Korea and the US wouldn't.

In Iran...Israel would most likely strike in the event of a nuclear strike. Even still...I doubt that it would be as destructive as many would believe it to be.

Just some more Henny Penny the sky is falling that gets people all excited...yet in the end doesn't mean a thing.

[fireball6283]

America's best allies are us and us.

[TheMason]

At 1/14/07 07:19 PM, Gul-Dukat-DS9 wrote: In my opinion, the Euro has made Europeans poorer, because it made possible to make everything as expensive as the most expensive country.

This only buttresses my point that France and Germany are vipers we need to watch out for rather falsely believe they are our friends. The international community exists in a state of anarchy, there is no supra-national government that can make binding laws or force its will upon states that act counter to international convention. Some may believe that the UN fills this void but that is not true. Saddam flouted UN will, but now there are many shrill voice who decry the war as illegal. And so the UN is too weak fill the void.

And so what governs international relations is that each country acts in its own best interests. Or what it perceives as its best interests. Removing Saddam from power was contrary to what France and Germany saw as their best interests. A more valuable Euro would begin to alleviate the problems you described. Therefore isn't it reasonable to think that it might just be possible that their opposition to the war may be motivated not because they think opposition is the correct thing to do...but because the invasion would keep them from fixing their own problems at the expense of the US?

[Leonardo-Da-Finchy]

At 1/14/07 07:19 PM, Gul-Dukat-DS9 wrote:
In my opinion, the Euro has made Europeans poorer, because it made possible to make everything as expensive as the most expensive country.

Which is why the UK holds onto Pound Sterling.

[Bolo]

Previously the clock has only been moved a few times in its 60-year history. This is a pretty big deal.

• 1949 - The Soviet Union tests its first atomic bomb. Clock changed to three minutes to midnight - four minutes closer to midnight.

• 1953 - The United States and the Soviet Union test thermonuclear devices within nine months of one another. Clock changed to two minutes to midnight - one minute closer, its closest approach to midnight to date.

• 1960 - In response to a perception of increased scientific cooperation and public understanding of the dangers of nuclear weapons, clock is changed to seven minutes to midnight - five minutes further from midnight.

• 1963 - The United States and Soviet Union sign the Partial Test Ban Treaty, limiting atmospheric nuclear testing. Clock changed to twelve minutes to midnight - another five minutes further.

• 1968 - France and China acquire and test nuclear weapons - 1960 and 1964 respectively - wars rage on in the Middle East, Indian subcontinent, and Vietnam. Clock changed to seven minutes to midnight - five minutes closer to midnight.

• 1969 - The U.S. Senate ratifies the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Clock changed to ten minutes to midnight - three minutes further from midnight.

• 1972 - The United States and the Soviet Union sign the SALT I - Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty) and the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. Clock changed to twelve minutes to midnight - two minutes further.

• 1974 - India tests a nuclear device - Smiling Buddha - SALT II talks stall. Clock changed to nine minutes to midnight - three minutes closer to midnight.

• 1980 - Further deadlock in US-USSR talks, increase in nationalist wars and terrorist actions. Clock changed to seven minutes to midnight - two minutes closer.

• 1981 - Arms race escalates, conflicts in Afghanistan, South Africa, and Poland. Clock changed to four minutes to midnight - three minutes closer.

• 1984 - Further escalation of the arms race under the U.S. policies of Ronald Reagan. Clock changed to three minutes to midnight - one more minute closer.

• 1988 - The U.S. and the Soviet Union sign treaty to eliminate intermediate-range nuclear forces, relations improve. Clock changed to six minutes to midnight - three minutes further from midnight.

• 1990 - Fall of the Berlin Wall, success of anti-communist movements in Eastern Europe, Cold War nearing an end. Clock changed to ten minutes to midnight - four minutes further.

• 1991 - United States and Soviet Union sign the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty. Clock changed to seventeen minutes to midnight - seven minutes further, its greatest distance from midnight so far.

• 1995 - Global military spending continues at Cold War levels; concerns about post-Soviet nuclear proliferation of weapons and brainpower. Clock changed to fourteen minutes to midnight - three minutes closer to midnight.

• 1998 - Both India and Pakistan test nuclear weapons in a tit-for-tat show of aggression; the United States and Russia run into difficulties in further reducing stockpiles. Clock changed to nine minutes to midnight - five minutes closer.

• 2002 - Little progress on global nuclear disarmament; United States rejects a series of arms control treaties and announces its intentions to withdraw from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty; terrorists seek to acquire nuclear weapons. Clock changed to seven minutes to midnight - two minutes closer.

• 2007 - Terrorist threats as well as the increased availability of Nuclear weapons to civilian factions necessitates the movement of the clock to five minutes to midnight - two minutes closer.

[Imperator]

• 2007 - Terrorist threats as well as the increased availability of Nuclear weapons to civilian factions necessitates the movement of the clock to five minutes to midnight - two minutes closer.

Someone explain to me how this is the US's fault again?

Question:

Is START the same thing as SALT, or are they different arms reduction treaties?

Bright future ahead for all you peeps waitin for the world to end.

[Der-Ubermensch]

Well if they're using Rumsfeld era intel for their predictions.. they're way up the creek.

[sellerdoor9]

oooh so *thats* what that iron maiden song was about.

there was me thinking it was just another crazy concept

[JMHX]

Think on the bright side - we will never hit 0 minutes to Midnight, because everyone will be dead.

[MortifiedPenguins]

At 1/15/07 04:54 PM, JMHX wrote: Think on the bright side - we will never hit 0 minutes to Midnight, because everyone will be dead.

Unless the nuclear fallout somehow moves the marker forward.

[SmilezRoyale]

At 1/15/07 05:59 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote:

At 1/15/07 04:54 PM, JMHX wrote: Think on the bright side - we will never hit 0 minutes to Midnight, because everyone will be dead.

Unless the nuclear fallout somehow moves the marker forward.

I say we all disarm, the east will agree that peace is good.

[MortifiedPenguins]

At 1/15/07 06:06 PM, SmilezRoyale wrote:

At 1/15/07 05:59 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote:

At 1/15/07 04:54 PM, JMHX wrote:

I say we all disarm, the east will agree that peace is good.

What happens when one person disarms but you let the other person keep thier weapons.

They'll fucking kill you.

My new quote I made up.

[Camarohusky]

At 1/15/07 06:08 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote: What happens when one person disarms but you let the other person keep thier weapons.

They'll fucking kill you.

My new quote I made up.

It's the worthless logic like that, that will lead to one person keeping their weapons.

[MortifiedPenguins]

At 1/15/07 06:17 PM, Camarohusky wrote:

At 1/15/07 06:08 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote:

It's the worthless logic like that, that will lead to one person keeping their weapons.

Peace isn't a human trait.

"So long as there are men there will be wars."
- Albert Einstein

[TheMason]

At 1/14/07 11:39 PM, Bolo wrote: This is a pretty big deal.

No it isn't, it is a group of people with an agenda trying to make people nervous and keep their Cold War relic relevant. I mean I grew up in the tail end of the Cold War and six of those times the clock happened was before I was 18...yet I made it out of childhood and the shadow of nuclear annihilation.

So yes the world we live in has not witnessed the expected "end of history", and it remains a dangerous place. But we do not live under as big a threat or shadow as we used to.

Furthermore, this clock is the expert consensus of people who are experts in fields and disciplines other than what they are talking about. It is not a true measure of anything, nor are they decision makers who can control what this clock is measuring.

So no it is not a pretty big deal...it is fairly meaningless. Henny Penny can go back outside now.

[patriotextremeist]

This article is brand new. They moved the clock to FIVE MINUTES to midnight.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070117/sc_nm/doo msday_clock_dc_4

[reviewer-general]

At 1/14/07 05:09 PM, TheMason wrote: In Iran...Israel would most likely strike in the event of a nuclear strike. . . .

Very true. Here.

[Whiplesh]

The way that the human race are producing nuclear weapons will lead us to extinction