Based on the last two, adjusting for modern weapons and excluding nuclear ones...

My god you're right, thats depressing

the finality of it is crushing. literally soul crushing

and though all is truly lost now. us few people in "some dark corner" will carry the memory of humanity going out WITH a fight. That man struggled, man split the atom to create the light if he had to, before he went forever into the night

Hundreds of millions to billions, depending on how long it goes on, whether it's nuclear or conventional and how severely the merchant trade is affected.

Most of those casualties would be in the third-world, though, so it'd be okay. As far as staples go yurop either grows its own or imports it from the New World and the Americas could feed the world all by themselves. A few billion dead Africans, Chinese and pajeets would probably give the world some badly-needed breathing room.

I'd be fairly worried about Japan though desu

>why would you ever even bother mobilizing an entire population, in 2016 no less, to work in factories, sell "war bonds", make your celebrities push propaganda, repurpose all of your national assets to produce steel, rubber and oil, and put an entire generation of men and some women, infront of the machine gun, if you were going to "press the button"?

Because nuclear weapons are horrifyingly powerful, but aren't "Push button, end war". Even a 50 megaton warhead, (because yeah, Tsar Bombas are just lying around) "only" has a a 20 PSI air blast radius of about 9 kilometers on an airburst, less if it's a groundburst. And if you're going to be trying to use your nukes to strike the enemy nuclear warheads on the ground, you'll need to groundburst,which correspondingly shortens the destructive radius as more of the energy goes into the ground.

Most nuclear weapons around are in the 1-5 megaton range. You need multiple warheads just to destroy a single city. You, quite simply, do not have the capacity, even in the U.S. and USSR, to completely eliminate a similarly strong rival. Deter, cause so much damage, tens of millions of deaths, yes. But you won't wipe out an entire major power that way, nor occupy anything with atomic weapons.

>you do realize the entire reason the nuclear bomb exists is that another "Somme" or "stalingrad" never happened again.

No, deterrence kept WW3 from breaking out. This might come as a shock to you, but deterrence has existed before the advent of the nuclear weapon. And some pretty major conventional battles HAVE happened, even in an age of nuclear weapons. The Tet offensive was a massive clusterfuck, but it still had almost one and a half million soldiers mixing it up.

1/2

2/2

>That there would be no need to build or move or produce products 24 hours a day, 7 days a week in factories.

Of course there will be. ESPECIALLY if the nukes fly and you suddenly have a gigantic fucking civic emergency in every major city.

>Total war is completely illogical, unnecessary and will never happen again.

It was completely illogical and unnecessary when it happened before, and that didn't stop it. You had people saying the exact same thing before WW1, and after it as well. You have interwar theoreticians like Fuller saying exactly what you're saying about nuclear war when it came to conventional bombing, how when you have fleets of large bombers blasting civilian centers, you'd have massive amounts of dead, the end of public resistance to fight, and the war would be over in a week, nobody could stand up to that. Harris was convinced all the way until 1944 that there would be no need for ground troops on the offensive, that they could deal with Germany by bombing the crap out of Berlin. They were all wrong. I suspect you are too.

1. gold doesnt die
2. silver dies
3. total amount of silver in the world as of this moment
>777,275 tonnes of silver mined and not used
zerohedge.com/news/2013-03-01/visualizing-all-silver-world
>166,650 tonnes of gold mined (gold isn't destroyed in its use unlike silver)
>634,199 tonnes of silver mined and used
silver is used irredeemably in things like electronics, medicine, & manufacturing.
for example
>historical worth of one 1 days manual labour (say fighting in a war) is 1.2 silver denarius equating 4.2grams of silver
commodityhq.com/education/a-brief-2000-year-history-of-silver-prices/
>16kg or 514.412 troy ounces of silver (irreversably lost in its use) per 1 singular tomahawk missile
>war against gadaffi libya-pan africa (think of it as a modern day carthage) started on the 19th March 2011
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_military_intervention_in_Libya
>by the 5th of August 2011 US Navy has fired 200 tomahawks @ 607kusd/ea or
>514.412 toz ag * 31.1035g ag/1 toz ag * 1 day manual labour/4.2g ag
>=3809.527 days of fighting by greek/roman empire soldiers or say
>greek hoplites
>number of this base unit denomination * various current value of soldier
>example 1 us marine worth 500 greek hoplites
>1 indonesian draft worth 10 greek hoplites
>1 us marine worth 50 indonesian drafts
500x4.2g ag = 2100 g ag = 67.5165 t oz ag for one days wage for an american marine killing indonesian drafts. likewise for a tomahawk missile to be worth it (in terms of silver alone)
>514.412 t oz ag / 67.5165 = 7.6 indonesian drafted soldiers

1/2

And thats off history, not fiat fractional reserve futures derivatives market. it is a transhistoric figure for wartime. (on the assumption of ratio between soldier:soldier worth which can come from present most accurate forecastable figures)
the difference is the silver used to kill that 7.6 indonesian drafts is unrecoverable, so the more reliance on this technology = greater remaining silver reserves are worth and the prices will constantly flux-adjustuate

>on the other side the US marines dieing will also change the labour value worth of silver being paid out diminishes as the total number of ongoing soldiers you would be paying work to for as long as there was (in this case/scenario) indonesian recruits to kill.

4. assume people only die for silver
@ 775 275 000 000 grams = 2 sides* 4.2g work per day * days fighting
>days fighting between 2 hegemonic dialectic equivalents of spartan hoplites @ 4.2grams/day pay
=94 545 731 707 days conflict
=259 029 401 years of conflict between 2 sides
then depends on army numbers
current active size of USMC = 182,000
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Marine_Corps
say 2 opposing and equal opposite forces of USMC = *2
>=711.619 years of perpetual warfare between 2 equal and opposing forces, accurate to 2000 years (hoplite-usmc) thus accurately within gauge.
3/3

4
>usa will be the next germany as is wwii to wwiii
>13 million german soldier force of wwii

>3.5 million died
figs from wiki
>=3.5dead/13total*711.619years conflict*182000*2 size/range of combatants in volume
>=69 738 685.137 people across conflict range @ all expendable silver

Approximately a maximum figure of 70 billion people will die in the next millennia, and they will die for silver.

>tldr depends on munitions stockpiles - war of attrition, as all wars are

retarded shit told me my shit was spam for 5 fucking hours waste of fucking shit spac cunt website fucking LOSERS

instrument x cost of silver / area
instrument x cost of silver / area / time
verses stockpiles, reserves, mining rates