In 1947, a declassified study by scientists at the Los Alamos laboratory first shed light on the question of how many nuclear bombs would be needed to end humanity. According to the study, it would take between ten and one hundred “nuclear superweapons” to cause the apocalypse. The destruction caused by these bombs would not be limited to fire and brimstone; they would also release radioactive poisons into the Earth's atmosphere, leading to skyrocketing rates of cancer, birth defects, and genetic abnormalities. The team conducting the study also sought to identify the power of these weapons.
Taking into account the power of an atomic bomb and doing some calculations, they concluded that no more than 100 atomic bombs would be needed to wipe out humanity. However, not all governments can afford such a large number of nuclear weapons due to their high cost and the risk of becoming a target for attack during the proliferation process. Advances in nuclear technology since then have made the devastation of a nuclear attack even worse. But what is the risk of nuclear war really? After talking to more than a dozen experts familiar with the horrors of nuclear conflicts, it appears that the possibilities are very small.
India and Pakistan are in a nuclear arms race, and historic enemies will soon patrol dangerous waters in close proximity with nuclear weapons aboard their ships. The document advocating disarmament proposes reducing the number of nuclear weapons in the world to 900 or less. Depending on the plan chosen by the president, US crews operating submarines that carry nuclear missiles, combat aircraft that can launch nuclear bombs, or troops that supervise intercontinental ballistic missiles on the ground will receive orders to launch. Scientists in Los Alamos understood the threat that aerial radiation would pose in the event of a nuclear war.
