1. 

Contrary to popular opinion on this forum, I don't believe Iran is the only nuclear state.

North Korea is nuclear. Kim Jung is crazy as a nutball. His people are starving. If that isn't a nuclear threat, what is?

Also, Pakistan, who people tend to forget about.

Israel has an illegal stock of nuclear weapons, which no-one knows where are pointing.

Nuke weapons can also used in something called 'EMP' technology. Exploded a long way above countries, these will basically fry any electronics or electrical system. Very effective against western countries, but less so against the less developed countries who have stocked this kind of weapon.

EMP strikes might be used against the States or Europe, less effective against Russia or China.

No. I don't think there will be a nuclear conflict, irrespective of whether Iran develops nuclear technology.

War isn't about killing innocents now-a-days, it's about controlling them.

The only threat to actually use a nuclear weapon comes from Iran; but even they know that as soon as they used it, their country would be obliterated so no, there is no nuclear war planned for the near future.

You are yet another young person who sees nuclear weapons as some kind of "super cannon" you can lob at each other.

It would mean the end of this planet as we know it, Those of us who lived through the cold war with the soviet union (1949-1990) knows the few mild conflicts today certainly will not result in nuclear war.Thats why we are stopping Iran getting the bomb. But in case I have sant you a link on how to survive a nuclear war.

The bona fidi countries that have a nuclear deterant will always make sure that any emerging State with designs to make and arm themselves with nuclear arms will crush their ambitions from day one , this is why we have had no nuclear conflicts since the Bay of Pigs incident in 1962. The problem with rougue states handling nuclear arms is that they are wholly unstable states in the first place and could well upset the equalibrium globally.

All out war? I doubt it. It would ruin too much of the planet & disrupt business - no country wants to ruin itself or its economy & wealthy corporations wouldn't want that, either. You take too much of a risk of ruining your own safety if you use nukes.

If there really are small nukes that can be blasted below ground & not make huge fallout problems all over, then I would think some country or terrorist group might try to go for a specific target with one.

I think anybody wanting to hit an enemy hard would be more likely to use a less virulent kind of bomb, and might want to actually destroy a place where they think an enemy might be thinking about making nukes.

Nuclear weapon's are a deterrent. Through the fear of their destructive

capacity a delicate equilibrium is maintained. It is a kind of mad logic,

and yes we would be better off with out them.....in an ideal world.

they are used as a way to dissuade the ennemi to attack. the only nuclear conflict i could forsee would be between iran and israel wich would turn into a nuclear catastrophy old fashion way :capitalists vs. communists/dictatorships

Nope.

while tensions are rising high all over the world will a nuclear war happen anytime soon and if not what is the point if havin nuke weapons and not using them?