Nuclear war real or not?

[Splash_King]

Bah.
As we all know, a dictatorship will eventually end with rebellion. The people will run over, vigilante style, until a new government is established. They'll get a communist/democratic/dictatorship government. Simple stuff to predict, really.

Unless the murderous and weapon-guided dictatorship of said gangsters destroys the human race alongside the many numbers lost by the apocalypse itself; combined with factors Trollface said, Nuclear Armageddon might leave our species as too close to extinction or flat-out extinction to have a functioning government. :lol:

 

[WiiAssasin]

Unless the murderous and weapon-guided dictatorship of said gangsters destroys the human race alongside the many numbers lost by the apocalypse itself; combined with factors Trollface said, Nuclear Armageddon might leave our species as too close to extinction or flat-out extinction to have a functioning government. :lol:

Wait....
The rulers of the post-apocalyptic era will be... gangsters?

 

[Splash_King]

Big cities destroyed, many politicians with 'em. Any of the suits left will be aiming to protect themselves and sure as **** not care for government. With all this chaos going on, looting and crime will explode, further chaos will evolve, and diplomacy will then have an all-time low in control. Fire power then becomes the route to obtaining and keeping power.

Army bases will most likely be tactical targets during a nuke war as well, so who's going to have the most fire power and especially numbers? Gangs.

 

[WiiAssasin]

Big cities destroyed, many politicians with 'em. Any of the suits left will be aiming to protect themselves and sure as **** not care for government. With all this chaos going on, looting and crime will explode, further chaos will evolve, and diplomacy will then have an all-time low in control. Fire power then becomes the route to obtaining and keeping power.

Army bases will most likely be tactical targets during a nuke war as well, so who's going to have the most fire power and especially numbers? Gangs.

There's a problem with your theory. If it's cities geting nuked, wouldn't the gangs also be destroyed? Gangs also had power when unimportant goods such as drugs were their goal. Gangs lose power when necessities such as food turn into primary goals.

 

[Splash_King]

Gangs lose power when necessities such as food turn into primary goals.

Gangs do swarm to densely populated capitals, but that doesn't mean they'l all get killed. I'm not talking about just race gangs either, criminals in general are gonna group up to prevent vigilante justice, as well as take all the food and water they want by force.

 

[WiiAssasin]

Gangs do swarm to densely populated capitals, but that doesn't mean they'l all get killed. I'm not talking about just race gangs either, criminals in general are gonna group up to prevent vigilante justice, as well as take all the food and water they want by force.

Gangs don't really work when they're not any laws to begin with. Laws are the reason gangs exist in the first place. Without laws, crime loses its motive.

Food would also have to be in the rural areas, with small and spread populations.

 

[Splash_King]

Crime certainly doesn't lose it's motive; to take what you want. Defying the law isn't the purpose hardened criminals have behind breaking said laws. In fact, crime has bigger motivation when there's no law to stop you other than the people you're doin' wrong, and the necessities for survival are scarce.

My point is, guns and numbers are power. The most common person to have either and especially both are criminals and gangs. Psychopaths and villainous scum aren't gonna have second thoughts about ravaging the supplies of survivors and markets and such during the first days of the apocalypse.

 

[WiiAssasin]

Crime certainly doesn't lose it's motive; to take what you want. Defying the law isn't the purpose hardened criminals have behind breaking said laws. In fact, crime has bigger motivation when there's no law to stop you other than the people you're doin' wrong, and the necessities for survival are scarce.

My point is, guns and numbers are power. The most common person to have either and especially both are criminals and gangs. Psychopaths and villainous scum aren't gonna have second thoughts about ravaging the supplies of survivors and markets and such during the first days of the apocalypse.

Not at all. In this modern world, in places where anarchy rules, gang intimidation has been countered by vigilante groups. To say, anyone believed to be a criminal is beaten, hanged, burned, and so forth.

A nuclear apocalypse would reduce government to primitive form. There would be less people, less technology. A small centered government would be formed. City states most likely.
It is much harder to pull a crime when you are trying to harm your own neighbor.

 

[Splash_King]

That would be true in Texas, where everyone has a gun. :lol:

You're not gonna be able to kill a group of criminals even if you outnumber them 5 to 1 if they have guns and you don't, because noone's gonna suicide themselves by grouping to a crowd and running at 'em. Let's not forget that modern people in modern societies can barely fend for themselves without electricity, none the less fight off or join a vigilante group.

Gangs are gonna strike fast and hard while everything is still ****ed up and chaotic, take all the supplies, kill people who've yet to band together if they resist, and out of intimidation and the chance of survival increase their own numbers. Rural towns, if they've the fire power, will definitely band together and protect their own, but if a large gang wanted to wage war, they'd be ****ed. Town with 30 hunting rifles > 10,000 handguns and submachineguns.

I can't agree that vigilante justice is very common in modern society, either... If it was, do you think Mexico would be in a state of pure fear of all the drug cartels?

 

[WiiAssasin]

That would be true in Texas, where everyone has a gun. :lol:

.... how did you know?

I can't agree that vigilante justice is very common in modern society, either... If it was, do you think Mexico would be in a state of pure fear of all the drug cartels?

It most certainly is.
To compare: America is in one of it's lowest points, and yet immigrants keep trying to get here. Mexican governors are killed and no one minds, reporters go missing, and there are no police. Happens in other 3rd world areas.

That is due to the power of the drug trade, which no one needs. If you were to set this in a post-apocalyptic setting, thedrug cartels would vanish. And since Mexico doesn't rely on technology as much, it could easily sustain itself in a food crisis.

 

[Splash_King]

It most certainly is.
To compare: America is in one of it's lowest points, and yet immigrants keep trying to get here. Mexican governors are killed and no one minds, reporters go missing, and there are no police. Happens in other 3rd world areas.

That ain't justice, necessarily.

That is due to the power of the drug trade, which no one needs. If you were to set this in a post-apocalyptic setting, thedrug cartels would vanish. And since Mexico doesn't rely on technology as much, it could easily sustain itself in a food crisis.

Drugs get them money for weapons. Weapons are power. They would no longer be drug cartels, but weapon depots controlled by mad criminals. And what would criminals do when they have numbers and weapons? Steal and loot everything.

I don't understand how you don't understand my point. >_>;

 

[WiiAssasin]

I don't understand how you don't understand my point. >_>;

Because it is impossible for that to happen.
An apocalypse would send mankind to a primitive age. But even with that, crime would certainly be scarce.
In order to gain power, they would need money. NO ONE would buy drugs when items such as food and shelter are top priority.

History repeats itself. This is what has happened in places where crime has taken over. In these areas, drug consumption is nonexistant. If you take those factors into the apocalyptic theory, then crime would be at a low, until civilization got back on course.

 

[Splash_King]

In order to gain power, they would need money. NO ONE would buy drugs when items such as food and shelter are top priority.

If you've been ****ing with me, piss off. :lol:

If you really don't understand my point by now... God save you from your ignorance. o_o;

 

[trollface]

Oh come on. Were already at post apocalypse... We haven't even discussed fallout.

Too many variables... At this point there's no telling what could happen. I personally believe that humans are way too fickle when desperate and facing extreme survival. Sure in situations where there is some hope they will work together and coexist but who knows, if faced with this scenario cannibalism is even a real possibility. And Im not talking eating the recently deceased, Im talking hunting and eating other survivors O_O Hee what was that movie The Road, where the cannibal baddies had a cellar full of prisoners...

 

[WiiAssasin]

If you've been ****ing with me, piss off. :lol:

If you really don't understand my point by now... God save you from your ignorance. o_o;

I only understand points supported by actual facts.