- The American Conservative - https://www.theamericanconservative.com -

The Comedy of Deterrers

Art by Michael Hogue

This infographic appeared in the November 2012 [1] issue of The American Conservative.

16 Comments (Open | Close)

16 Comments To "The Comedy of Deterrers"

#1 Comment By An Anachronistic Apostle On November 16, 2012 @ 9:00 am

France vs. U.K.: 2.5 to 1

Have they ever really forgotten Agincourt?

#2 Comment By yebbut On November 17, 2012 @ 7:17 am

’tis a shame that graphic didn’t include Iran with 0.0

#3 Comment By John McCarthy On November 17, 2012 @ 8:24 am

The amount of overkill capacity attributed to Israel seems unbelievable. Can the author provide the source of his data and/or proof of its accuracy?

#4 Comment By ghouri On November 17, 2012 @ 12:26 pm

America has after Israelis nukes per person more than any other country.

#5 Comment By MK Ultra On November 17, 2012 @ 12:42 pm

LOL @ that article. Who has the most nukes per person…yet, you conspicuously and shamelessly leave the US out of the equation. Who can take this seriously after that? It is reported that USans have some 9 guns per person on average. I think they can claim double that figure with nukes. But, of course, Iran is the threat. Ha ha!

#6 Comment By John Darling On November 17, 2012 @ 12:44 pm

Ha, ha! If these terrorist nations had enough nukes to blow only themselves up. we wouldn’t need to worry. Who would care? The problem is that they have enough nukes to blow the entire galaxy and the rest of us with them.

#7 Comment By Rex in Austrlalia On November 17, 2012 @ 5:56 pm

Israel, although never officially admitting it has nukes (and not being a signatory to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (like India and Pakistan)) is assumed by foreign intelligence agencies (CIA, MI6, etc) to have 200 or so nukes. Israeli nuclear whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu confirmed this.

#8 Comment By Russell Seitz On November 18, 2012 @ 1:27 am

John McCarthy’s incredulity should dissappear if he checks the area and population of the nations in question and does the math-the arsenal statistics come primarily from the FAS database.

#9 Comment By Claus-Erik Hamle On November 18, 2012 @ 12:48 pm

The US aims to achieve a disarming first strike capability according to missile engineer Bob Aldridge-www.plrc.org. GPS (NAVSTAR) was made to get an accuracy of less than 30 meters, necessary to destroy missile silos. The US Navy can track and destroy all enemy submarines simultaneously according to Bob Aldridge. Professor J. Edward Anderson, “Deployment of anti-missile missiles in Eastern Europe is part of a first-strike strategy.” The missiles in Eastern Europe will be operational by 2018. This leads to Launch On Warning by 2017.

#10 Comment By Russell Seitz On November 18, 2012 @ 8:55 pm

Mkultra: “ you conspicuously and shamelessly leave the US out of the equation

Wrong- the US graph is on the left hand side of the illustration.

#11 Comment By c matt On November 19, 2012 @ 10:37 am

Interesting graph, but not sure how meaningful it is. The US may have a relatively low person or area to nuke ratio, but far higher delivery capabilities. China’s large population skews the numbers in the low ratio direction. Russia seems to have a high person to nuke ratio, but it has a dwindling population so that can skew the numbers as well. Ditto with Israel – low population with larger number of nukes. Clearly, Israel outranks its neighbors, but in absolute terms, not sure it could do much on world scale. Interesting, but not sure just how useful.

Then again, it doesn’t take much to cause a lot of trouble on a world scale.

#12 Comment By jef On November 20, 2012 @ 8:31 am

US and Russia both have thousands of nukes. Numbers for UK, France, Israel, India, Pakistan, and China are in the 100’s (though China’s numbers are suspect).

To compare these numbers against population and area of a country is not relevant to a discussion of nuclear arsenals. What a ridiculous use of statistics to create a biased graphic!

#13 Comment By Evan On November 21, 2012 @ 8:27 am

If it is helpful:


#14 Comment By Oliver Neukum On November 23, 2012 @ 6:59 am

You do not want to nuke yourself. So what good is a ratio per capita of your own population? You need to compute the figure for the enemy’s population or country size. Of course, to do so, you’d need to make up your mind about who the enemy is.

#15 Comment By KD On November 25, 2012 @ 10:38 pm

Israel at 50.6 megatons per million population is 5.6 megatons per 100,000 population or 5.6 tons per Israeli.

That is low. Much of the “let my people go” sting was preplanning the theft of trillions in assets plus warheads from the USSR. Both succeeded.

Israel’s not Iraq’s WMD’s were and are the “existential threat”.

#16 Comment By Kratoklastes On November 26, 2012 @ 6:45 pm

@KD – “Israel at 50.6 megatons per million population is 5.6 megatons per 100,000 population or 5.6 tons per Israeli.”

You dropped a zero there… should read “Israel at 50.6 megatons per million population is 50.6 tons per Israeli” – you outsmarted yourself by the (unnecessary) intervening step converting to MT/100k. All you needed to do was divide through by a million (mega).

Does anyone think that the US would permit Iran to move to a policy of “nuclear ambiguity”?

Why is the Zionist occupying force in Palestine not subject to the Symington Amendment (now s101 of the Arms Export Control Act), which forbids economic and military aid to countries who are not subject to, and in compliance with, IAEA scrutiny and the NNPT?