Conversation

so historically you could resolve disputes between states with a conventional war. that was fairly effective one way or another but nukes have fucked that up for major powers. very difficult to go to war with a nuclear power if you are a nuclear power too. risky

145

QC (in Berlin 7/29-???)

@QiaochuYuan

Replying to

@eigenrobot

so nukes have suppressed small wars at the expense of potentially increasing the risk of large wars? is this ~fragility~

7:25 AM · Apr 5, 2021Twitter Web App

Replying to

i think they may have suppressed both practically speaking. with some greater possibility of utterly catastrophic war although that seems less likely since 89 or so

entirelyuseless

@entirelyuseles

Apr 5, 2021

cameronharwick.com/blog/dont-worr

Evil (Political) Scientist

Replying to

and

Interesting take because people who study this sort of thing argue the opposite. I take this idea as equally valid since there's no non-terrible way to study this, though.

Replying to

and

James C Scott intensifies

Coder, A CoderDyne Account

Replying to

and

Not quite - what we get instead are proxy wars. The major powers backing smaller nations over contested territory.

Replying to

and

Sort of the reverse TBH? You've suppressed large Great Power wars but increased the number of proxy wars. Pre nukes proxy wars often drew in Great Powers.