Would nuclear war be as catastrophic as media shows or is it just fear mongering?
>>62914799>Uh oh, hey anons, should I be afraid?Be afraid anon
nuclear winter is a meme and targets haven't included pop centers since the 90s. you'll be fine
>>62914799
>>62914799you wouldn't die instantly, things would get notably worse, though.
>>62914819>literal nafotroon xitter post
>>62914799>Would nuclear war be as catastrophic as media showsNo.>is it just fear mongering?Yes, but also a lot of mutually beneficial pretending between Western media and russoid saber rattling.
>>62914799It would ruin media, hence their fear mongering. Real people would be fine, if a bit inconvenienced, which would actually benefit children.
>>62914825>He thinks nafoid shitposting means it's not true.I'm sorry to tell you this anon, but even webmrelated is unnecessary because Russia is just another deeply centralized shithole, like every other thirdie hole in the world.
>>62914823>nukes fell down>how is the situation?>notably worseLmao
>>62914799Yes, it is catastrophic, but it's all saber rattling as nuclear war implies mutually assured destruction and no egotistical leader is willing to give up their own power, it's like committing national suicide.
>>62914825>troons live rent free in his head
>>62914835What does counter look like? If they just nuke the coasts we double win.
>>62914846On paper, much the same. "Counterforce" (it's technically a meme because there are plenty of "strategic" targets that are dual-use locations, like airports and railyards, that are also located in typically heavily populated civilian centers and cities) strikes that target things of "strategic" value.In reality, it's Russia needing to split a number of weapons in dubious condition between several nuclear nations, probably leading to them either dumping their load on one country (probably USA) and accepting that they're about to eat shit from the others, or they'll actually try to service all nations, therefore softening the blow each would otherwise receive if they were lone targets.Russia literally can't nuke *everybody*, but every nuclear NATO/American ally *can* nuke all of Russia. A lot.
>>62914799>localised nuclear exchange on the battlefield probably won't change anything to your life if you aren't fighting there>global nuclear war with every nation involved that would be catastrophic and set back humanity by a lot. Even smaller nuclear nations like France have the potential to remove the 100 biggest cities of any country in the world. That's millions of deaths and infrastructure damages that'll take years to get back
>>62914799Nuclear war scenario huh.Let's see>No electronics(inclueds most modern vehicles)>No electricity>No more water pumps>No more easily available food>No gov, at lest for some time>No modern medicineYou all will literally be serfs again working on some corn field for rest of your life just to survive
>>62914878Corn is raised for .gov subsidized ethanol, and industrial feedlots, ignorant urbanite. You would not have any of those in your scenario.
>>62914878Vvvvggghhh retvrn to neo-feudalism
>>62914913I forgot HFCS slop. With the waste diverted. Again: gone.
>>62914865If russia nuked US and yuros were not targeted, I doubt they would nuke back.>Would I bet my survival on it, if I was russia?Probably not, but only France is the real wildcard. The bongs will almost certainly bitch out if not touched.
>>62914878>Laughs in backyard garden, trapping, hunting and fishing while city cucks literally eat each otherClear skies, clear horizon.
>>62914952>he thinks the rule of law will still be in effect and his comfortable rural life will continue
>>62914799Its always fear mongering aka making you scared to fight (((them)))
>>62914878jokes on you if you think I care about my or other's lives lmao
>>62914952Anon, once the food runs out all the surviving urbanites will flee to the countryside and deplete your local resources like locusts, and they will try to take what's yours. The only way to defend yourself is to hunker down with like-minded individuals, strength in numbers. Homesteaders will be isolated, surrounded and killed.
>>62914996Or an underground complex with hydroponics, generators and enough fuel to last for a year.
>>62914836ask yourself:>how close would the closest nuke actually hit?go drop a nuke map pin on it. here's the reality, your city center probably isn't going to be hit, because most nukes are going to be shot at other nukes and military concentrations. there aren't THAT many nukes to go around, once you start counting mandatory targets and the reality that you would never shoot all your nukes because you need a continuing deterrent when it's over. when all is said and done there is a lot of area and not that many nukes.
>>62915024Everything over 500 kilotons and I'm fucked
>>62915073I dunno, I have like, 4 military bases in my county, one of which is definitely getting hit and I won't even lose the windows at my house.
>>62914814>implying Russia won't deliberately target civilian centersOh my sweet summer child
>>62915092they don't have enough nukes to hit more than the most major cities after more important things got hit. there just aren't enough nukes to go around.
>>62915101Putin doesn't care if Russians get nuked. He won't target the US military at all, just U.S. cities from the comfort of his bunker then he will fuck off to Argentina to sip some martinis for the last few years
>>62914814Only the US doesn't target population centers. Small nuclear powers have to in order to provide effective deterrence, and Russia is Russia, they'll throw a few at European capitals and the largest American cities out of spite. Even from the US, Moscow is one massive military target with how Russia is set up.
>>62915143Don't be fucking retarded. There is nowhere for Putin to fuck off to if he ook ooks and nooks something. Even China is more likely to join in the nuke-fest rather than take him in.
>>62914811>Be afraid anonAngél here, do not be afraid, anon
>>62915191Iran
>>62914799Not until...Wait for it...THE DAY AFTER.
>>62915211>IranGets nuked by Israel because why not
>>62915211Why would they want that liability?
>>62915229>Israel deciding to nookWill never happen>>62915231Money
>>62915235>Will never happenDuring an all-out nuke-fest? You really think they won't delete their main adversary from the map?
>>62915143>comfort of his bunkerthere isn't a structure theoretically constructable that is survivable against superfuzed MIRVs.
>>62915235What??? You think he will pack up some gold bars in a suitcase and call it a day?
>>62915235What money? Putin's wealth comes from owning the Russian economy via oligarchs, trustfunds and the like, if there is no Russian economy his money is gone. Aside maybe from a few yatchs and assets in the West that are frozen there is no much he could offer Iran.Tech would have been a more intelligent answer on your part, but I highly doubt it would outweight the risk of harboring the guy that caused nuclear war.
>>62915244>you think he will pack up some gold bars in a suitcase and call it a day?It's literally that easy
>>62915255You are retarded.
>>62915255Anon do you seriously think that couple of gold bars are enough to hide a person responsible for Nuclear war in your country? Whole world will be gunning for that dude.Is everything ok with your brain?
>>62915267>>62915277You underestimate the stupidity of the third world
>>62914799Depends on the targeting plan, realistically the "escalate to de-escalate" scenario is the most likely deployment we'll live to see. That would be akin to Russia or the US destroying a key enemy formation with tactical nuclear weapons while simultaneously maneuvering its other forces into a entrenched position and using diplomatic channels to attempt a cease-fire.Strategic Nuclear war is really a meta-bluff to keep nation on nation nuclear exchanges off the table, mythological "deterrence"
>>62915280No, we are correctly assessing your stupidity as you dig in and try to defend your idiotic talking point with more desperate arguments.
>>62915288People try to kill him every day. How long did it take Bin Laden to finally get zeroed after crashing planes into NYC?
>>62915283So let's say that Russia will nuke Ukraine in order to "escalate to de-escalate" and US in response will nuke what, also Ukraine?
>>62914799Who’s gonna do shit? Nobody. Russia? Pfffffffffft. I would be surprised if their shitass missiles even function. China is a peasant nation with a shit military and doesn’t dare tango with a nation that is at the same time their absolute betters and their biggest customer, and who could turn their economy off by just saying “sorry sweaty, you have lost sea and air lane privileges”. Maybe the biggest threat is some dirt nation nuking Israel, but who cares? They deserve it. America has no peers. We will be just fine.
>>62914936The frogs are the only country without a no first use nuclear policy. Zey vill erase Russia for ze srill of it all.
>>62915304>I would be surprised if their shitass missiles even function.I saw one failed test and one successful
>>62915298Russia gets nuked off the face of the Earth if they dare nuke Ukraine. You don't understand the severity of the nuclear taboo at all. You don't get away with using nukes against a non-nuclear state, if that happens then it's a free for all and you will see countries all around the world getting their own nuclear programs back up and running. An outcome every member of the nuclear club doesn't want to see happening.Ukraine is not just under implicit US protection but they literally have a treaty with China as well putting them under the Chinese nuclear umbrella.>>62915297As traumatic as it was for the US psyche, only 3000 people died on 9/11.You are talking about nuclear war, fallout across most of the world, and millions of deaths even in countries far removed from the conflict. Not comparable at all.
>>62914799Probably significantly worse than what media portrays, a lot of the weather models previously used for the simulations of the fallouts are outdated by todays standard. Those not immediately vaporized by the detonations or succumbing shortly after from radiation poisoning will have to endure the better part of a decade of nuclear winter. Millions of tons of ash will be thrown up into the atmosphere and block out the sun. You won't be able to grow or farm anything, If you were to somehow make it through what could only be considered hell on earth you then have to deal the scorching sun because the ozone layer will be non-existant essentially.
>>62915298B61-12s hitting the majority of Russian and Belarusian tactical command structures effectively crippling any offensive control at the tactical level in Western Europe while Immediately opening direct communication with Putin and talking him down. Stracom can on paper surgically destroy Russian tactical command without killing many civilians. "Shaping adversary response" or what ever jargon they use now.
>>62915306No one sane would retaliate against Russia using a nuke in Ukraine with their own nuclear weapons.
>>62915340You sure you want to test out that theory?
>>62914814nuclear winter will just cancel out global warming, bringing climate back to normal
>>62914799it would be fun. fun!
>>62915363Its not theory its logic, you need to give Russia a chance to de-escalate which is not possible if you nuke them.This anon gets it >>62915339>B61-12s hitting the majority of Russian and Belarusian tactical command structures effectively crippling any offensive control at the tactical level in Western Europe while Immediately opening direct communication with Putin and talking him down.
>>62915017I don't think many anons ITT can afford a homestead, let alone a doomsday bunker. But even with a bunker you're always at the disadvantage of being outnumbered. I recommend you read on the tactics and strategies employed by white Rhodesian farmers during the Bush War, as they were essentially a minority surrounded by a hostile majority.
>>62914825That doesn't make it not true. The vast majority of Russians live in like 7 cities.
In the cold war when we had like 5x as many nukes wielded by the US and Russia, yes that's a lot scarier. Nowadays, there simply aren't enough nukes to go around>inb4 but what about all the unactivated ones in reserveDo you really think they'd be activated in time?Psrsonally I'm just going to move to south america if we get really close to nuclear war as it should be basically untouched by it. Not having any nukes and not really taking sides in conflicts means no one has a reason to nuke you and for all of Brazil's problems, they grow enough food and generate enough power that the people won't starve and the lights won't go out.
>>62914878...this image is from a gay porno, isn't it
>>62914799You know the Beirut explosion? Imagine if it was like 200 times as powerful and happened in every big city across the world. It'd be really bad economically because harbors everywhere would be fucked, but ultimately speaking it's a "crippling blow", not a "deathblow"If I recall the nuclear winter that was predicted was also overblown.
>>62914799>Would nuclear war be as catastrophic as media shows or is it just fear mongering?It will be worse.
>>62915608>and for all of Brazil's problems, they grow enough food and generate enough power that the people won't starve and the lights won't go out.We have a huge vulnerability in that sense. We don't produce not even 10% of the fertilizers we use in our crops. And guess where the majority of it comes from?
>>62915629True, but that's because it's cheaper than the fertilizer you would be making at home
>>62915586Do you have any specific books in mind?
>>62915143Anon, I dont know if you have heard Milei talking.
>>62915024My city center straddles the single most important logistics hub and bridge on the Mississippi. It gon get nuked. Cep of Russia weapons is large enough that I may get lucky and die instantly.
Everyone thinks that the huge majority of Russian nukes just don’t work because these things have a service life. To go beyond the service life of the Minuteman III for example (claimed to be 10 years but probably a lowball figure) the U.S. spent a fortune refurbishing them and after their last refurbishing in 2012 everything in the missile was replaced and only the shell is the original. It’s not just the warhead but also everything else that degrades over time — because they have to be kept fueled up and warm for a launch at any moment. There’s NO possibility that Russia has maintained the huge majority of their nuclear fleet to the same level. VERY likely that they just let them wear out, maybe only changing batteries and other basic upkeep tasks, if even that. It cost the U.S. to keep just 450 M3s running 7 BILLION dollars. Can you imagine Russia spending that kind of money to keep their old Topols running? No that’s laughable. What they do is simply build new ones. So it’s very unlikely that no Russian ICBM that over 10-15 years old works — and that’s at BEST since corruption may have killed them years before. They are probably well aware of this fact which is why they seem to prioritize new missiles so much.
>>62915340France would 100% launch nukes at Moscow if Russia attacked the mainland US with nukes.
>>62915335>Those not immediately vaporized by the detonations or succumbing shortly after from radiation poisoning will have to endure the better part of a decade of nuclear winter.There has been many hundreds of surface detonations and yet no nuclear winter. The thing is that large fires just produce ash, which quickly falls to the ground, supervolcanoes and asteroid impacts can produce a nuclear winter by spewing huge amounts of sulphur aerosols into the upper atmosphere, nukes cant.
>>62914799Well, it's not catastrophic - the power of nuclear bombs is exaggerated, it hasn't increased much since Hiroshima, most of the power goes right into the atmosphere- the main targets of the strike should be military facilities (with nuclear rocket launchers)but still, very bad, it hit a city, without communication and medical assistance, the number of victims will be enormous
>>62915339>B61-12s hitting the majority of Russian and Belarusian tactical command structures effectively crippling any offensive control at the tactical level in Western Europe while Immediately opening direct communication with Putin and talking him down.There is absolutely no fucking way Putin wont retaliate launch at that point. If he is smart he goes exclusively for a handful of ultra high value targets like London/New York/Seattle/Brussels/Los Angeles/Washington and then offers a ceasefire, which has to be taken or there will be a total collapse in western countries as everyone drops what they are doing and runs for the hills because this is surely the big one. By trading low human loss military targets for high value civilian targets Putin would be able to completely burn any nuclear warmongering by the West for generations. The voters would explicitly demand unilateral nuclear disarnament after NATO initates a nuclear exchange and it backfires into extermination strikes on NATO civilian targets because the government can certainly not be trusted with nuclear weapons any more.
>>62915823>France would 100% launch nukes at Moscow if Russia attacked the mainland US with nukes.No France would 100% declare itself neutral. That is the most optimal strategy since post war an intact France may exploit both the bombed out wreckage of America and Russia. Honhonhonhon.
>>62915339russia would absolutely launch everything if a single nuke landed on russian soil.
>>62914799It would be worse, but not for the reasons media depicts. Yeah, the initial death count would be horrible and so would be dealing with radiation, but the real problem is how basically everything today relies on complex supply chains. Which is obviously optimal from civil viewpoint, we couldn’t have our current living standards without that, but it also means that collapsing one part of the chain collapses many other things.Food, drinkable water, medicine, essential technology, communications, it all would be fucked, and because we have so many people around, there’s no way to feed everyone by returning to feudal farmer lifestyle. There would be starvation, unrest and violence, and unless you genuineily are 100% self-sufficient, healthy and live in a place where nobody would realistically find you (which is an *extremely* small subset of people, despite the fact that every larpy prepper thinks that they count), your life will become shit.
>>62915873But will there be time for any kind of negotiation once the nukes targeting the cities are in the air?
>Nuclear winter is a meme>Interceptors and defenses exist (I know they won't catch everything)>Russia has around the same amount of nukes as the US but spends only a fraction on maintaining them>No one would ever launch all nukes at once because the moment you have 0 nukes while your enemy has 100 left you are cookedIt would be bad and cause hundreds of millions of casualties but humanity would not be wiped out.
>>62915629>>62915608Yeah according to the eggheads, if it comes to global thermonuclear doomsday scenario, Brazil, along with Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay, would be among the best places to ride it out. Combined, these countries export foodstuffs to feed over a billion people, so even with reduced cropyields due to lack of fertilizer or whatever other cause, there'd be ample supply.
>>62916002(I do not think it will come to this though, this is an extremely catastrophic doomer scenario involving everyone launching every single nuke and nuclear winter being a thing)
>>62914878>>62915611His dream lives on...
>>62916008Nuclear winter isn't real and was based off erroneous assumptions about modern nuclear weapons. If everything was about as efficient as the early bombs and they all exploded they might have a point but it'll probably be extremely slight global climate wise but it'll devastate agriculture due to contamination.
>>62914799More catastrophic because most media only depicts the first day-1 year down the line, not the long term effects like affected nation states disintegrating into civil war as the existing government becomes completely discredited, famine killing even more people than the bombs (especially in Africa/Southwest Asia, where their populations would be intact but have their largest economic partners and sources of imported food destroyed), collapse in basic literacy making it impossible to maintain what's left of a modern society.The only really popular media depicting nuclear war's long term impacts are Fallout and Metro 2033 and even their depictions are really just surface level (and in Fallout's case, literal self-parody).
>>62916030hey faggot nice take but get some new pictures
>>62916037It's a work in progress.
>>62916002>India and Australia still existTerrible timeline
>>62916025I'm not sure about the nuclear winter part, desu, I've heard conflicting accounts, and I am not an expert. But I don't think it'd be a realistic scenario because many nukes would be intercepted and others would not work. I think there's a strong point when people point out tritium having a half-life of 10 years and lack of proper maintainance and money being poured on Russia's nuclear arsenal. My bet is that they have enough nukes working so as to be a threat but not enough to end civilization.Most of the nuclear winter predictions come from the 1980s when the amount of nuclear warheads held by the USSR and NATO were twice what they are today, and were properly maintained.
>>62914814>haven't included pop centers>Only the US doesn't target population centers. What the fuck are you guys talking about? The US has like a dozen nukes aimed at moscow. Population centers are where all the manufacturing, training, ports, airfields, and infrastructure is located. Each major city would get a dozen nukes each. There are only so many military bases and they are all small enough for a single nuke to take them out. The US has 400 active nuclear silos, that still leaves 1300 nukes left over. What the fuck do you think they are going to strike, cornfields? Even the small town next to where I live has a raytheon factory in it.And if you think you'll be fine in a small town, you're retarded. You really think your town has a deer population large enough to feed 15k people for even a week? Most people don't grow their own crops and it takes months for harvest (if you are lucky enough to get hit in the right time of year) so people won't be growing any food of their own. There would be no food, no water, and no gas to do anything. Almost everyone would have to be relocated to survivor camps so logistics will squeeze out whatever surviving reserves will be able to function. Your life would be a living hell for many years after a nuclear war, unless you're a doom prepper that has a years of food in storage, long enough to survive the winter and start growing your own food and wait for harvest.
>>62916002>reduced cropyields due to lack of fertilizer or whatever other cause, there'd be ample supply.And where will they get the oil and diesel to run container ships? Where are they going to get the seeds, pesticides, and fertilizers from? At what ports will they be able to drop off their supplies? How will australia and south armerica farm in mass without gas to run their combine and tractors? They won't be able to provide enough food for their own people, let alone the rest of the world.Without oil the world grinds to a halt.
>>62916063>>62916078A nuke will not suddenly destroy every single person who knows where food and fuel storage facilities are and everyone in charge of disaster management in this scenario. Both countries have food stores and systems in place to ensure continuance of government and a semblance of order for a period of time exceeding the initial effects.
>>62916078Oh don't get me wrong, life quality is going to suck, but food, medicine, oil, basic survival stuff will be put on priority. Brazil is the #10 oil exporter, and Argentina is #22. In case there is a shortage, I assume barter agreements could be set up.The consoomer lifestyle will be definitively over, but the basics would be prioritized. Remember I said "among the best places to ride it out" and not "you are gonna continue as if nothing's happened".
>>62916080lol
>>62915912That would a (tactical)response to their nuclear attack(also tactical)not the opening move.>>62915873The attack upon Russia would be isolated to military targets and launched with F-35s.(low probability of detection) The whole idea behind a scalable or flexible response to Russian nuclear aggression is that we can bring them to the negotiation table by a) showing them we will nuke them and b) disabling enough of their military command structure that a broken back nuclear war wouldnt go in their favor.(Attacking American or English cities with ICBMs ends Russia as a state FYI.)Keep in mind my entire post is operating under the pretense that Russia used nuclear weapons to end the war in Ukraine.(which I believe is the only likely use of nuclear weapons in our life time)
>>62914825This post is a great example of why ad hominem fallacy and whataboutism don’t work. It may be true that the poster here is NAFO, hell he might even be a tranny, but that doesn’t change the fact that all you need is a handful of minutemen to wipe out 90% of Russia’s useful population.
>>62914799>Would nuclear war be as catastrophic as media showsYes. Obviously. But its not a planet killer.
>>62916145If NAFO betas dont make you feel the same revulsion that ziggers and pajeets do, you're part of the problem.
>>62916140>That would a (tactical)response to their nuclear attack(also tactical)not the opening move.if russia hit ukraine and then the us hits inside of russia, russia will go all in.the us could hit russia inside of ukraine and it likely wouldn't go MAD.
>>62915340Not this fucking shit againWe had a whole thread about this issue this morning, read the following post for a very simple explanation as to why russia using nukes in ukraine guarantees nuclear war (and russia being turned into a parking lot)>>62912812If you don’t have the attention span this anon summarised it even better and simpler>>62912931There is no such thing as a tactical nuclear weapon and when dealing with nuclear armed state actors there is no limited exchange.
>>62916140>That would a (tactical)response to their nuclear attack(also tactical)not the opening move.Clinically retarded take. Russia using a tac nuke in Ukraine would cause a complete shitstorm but neither the US nor NATO would do anything kinetic directly against Russia because that would trigger a nuclear holocaust. Idk what the consequences would be, but no one is going to hit play on Revelations.
>>62916173Please read>>62916168there is no limited nuclear exchange. It’s basic game theory. Putin will never nuke ukraine.
>>62916168>>>62912812 That anon is, equally, a retard. No one is prepared to sacrifice all of Europe and North America for Ukraine. Russia setting off a bomb would be the dumbest shit ever because the consequences would be beyond severe. But those consequences will not be an exchange.
>>62916179>there is no limited nuclear exchange. It’s basic game theory.iTs GaMe tHeorY! t. $20 an hour.
>>62916155Eh I’d be lying if I said a lot of ukraine supporters annoy me with their covid tier shilling, but just because people on my side are annoying doesn’t suddenly make me change my side or change my inherent beliefs on its own. Murder and invasions are generally bad, I’m not gonna change my stance on that because some guy on twitter with a rainbow flag also does. Also I fucking love NATO so you can suck my dick commie
>>62916185>my side My side is America. And this does not adress the core argument: NAFO fags, ziglets and poojeets are utter fucking cancer who have ruined this board. >Also I fucking love NATOCringe.
>>62916181Okay. Tell me exactly why the reasoning is wrong? The best part is there’s MULTIPLE reasons why Russia nuking ukraine would result in nuclear warYou’ve got>regular MAD doctrine/ nuclear game theory >chinese umbrella treaty>the nuclear taboo which the other nuclear powers will enforce at any cost>the fucking french who can never truly be predicted >the bongs who have wanted russia erased for the last half milleniumI mean christ anon give me a good reason why they WON’T nuke russiaAnd no, “avoiding” nuclear holocaust doesn’t work as a counter argument, because by allowing russia to nuke ukraine you’re essentially allowing a nuclear holocaust to occur in the future, in a way you do not control.
>>62916161I don't think they would, they can't survive a nuclear exchange, they can survive a peace treaty. >>62916173Wrong, no need to call me retarded because you disagree with me ,Just because you can't envision a limited exchange doesn't mean it's not the most likely outcome. The Russian state would end a costly war with nukes it won't end Russia as a sovereign nation because it lost its conventional command structure on its Western flank in retaliation for its first use of nuclear weaponry.They make (many) mistakes but they are not insane.
>>62916195>resorting to the “both sides” copeHow’s the weather in Kansas Oblast john wayne?
>>62916207I’m gonna say it again anonThere is no such thing as a limited nuclear exchange, at least not between parties capable of MAD.We figured this out in the sixties. I know how you guys feel, I wish something would happen too, but it won’t and never will.
>>62916211any time i see someone make a post like yours referencing "both sides" or "le nootroler" i know you're some fat titted reddit neckbeardactual Ukrainians must fucking cringe when they find out fags like you exist and think you're cheerleaders for their cause lol
>BE AFRAID WEST>LET US RAPE OUR NEIGHBORS AND EVENTUALLY YOU OR ELSE WE'LL NOOOOOOOK>IF WE NOOOK YOU ALL THESE HORRIBLR THINGS WILL HAPPEN TO YOU ARE YOU AFRAID YET? YOU SURRENDER YET?Patton was fucking right.
>>62916199>I mean christ anon give me a good reason why they WON’T nuke russiaBECAUSE IT RESULTS IN THE END OF EUROPE AND NORTH AMERICA Second strike is a thing. MAD is a thing. You have to be 18 to post here. Go to bed. >>62916207>Just because you can't envision a limited exchange doesn't mean it's not the most likely outcomeIts not the most likely outcome because the second we go kinetic, thats it, its over for everyone. Saying we would launch because Russia launches in Ukraine is like saying we would launch because India launched on Pakistan.
>>62916211>My side is America>booth sides! One side, as stated.
>>62916222>AND EVENTUALLY YOUOmg like Hitler, right!
>>62914799Yeah it would be pretty bad, mostly because the cork is out of the bottle and after the first nuke flies it's open season. Then you get retards like Pakistan and India who think it's perfectly justifiable and start nuking people like it's nothing. Pretty soon the world is uninhabitable.>>62916230You're replying to a shill, he's only here to spout talking points in thinly veiled "weapons" threads that are just more propaganda for the bumfight. Jannies were slapping these faggots around hard, should've seen them raging as their shitposts got pruned.
>>62916228Although I doubt that russia’s current arsenal could cause damage to america and europe anywhere close to what we would do to russia, I see where you’re coming from, and you’re technically right. Unfortunately, once the russians nuke ukraine, the west no longer has a choice, since like I said before repeatedly a failure to respond immediately leads to total devastation in the future. To paraphrase that other anon>if someone uses their nukes a little, they are willing to use them a lot, and it’s better you try and kill them NOW at any cost than risk them fucking you overOf course all of this only works in theory specifically because it can only be theory, because russia will NEVER NUKE UKRAINE
>>62916230>hate nafo troons and ziglets>hate nato Yeah one side sure budUnless you’re a whole new breed of /pol/ack>>62916240I’m a shill for calling out a well documented russian shill talking point?It’s like the spiderman pointing meme at this point kek
>>62916106I mean, those places would be better off but they aren't going to help out the rest of the world. They will be struggling to make shit run in their own countries.>>62916080>A nuke will not suddenly destroy every single person who knows where food and fuel storage facilities are and everyone in charge of disaster management in this scenarioThere is no place in america that stockpiles food. The oil reserves would be on the target list. Fuel and food would be in incredibly short supply and even harder to get to places that need it. Trainyards would be absolutely devastated and would take years to get functioning again. Any supplies would be moved by trucks and their logistics would be limited to survivor camps. You're not going to be able to ride this out in your home, you're going to pack your shit and be forced to live in tent cities for years. Imagine if shit goes down in the fall, there won't be any crops of any kind for a year. Turkey, ducks, deer, and fish won't be able to feed any small town for any length of time. Most of those things are strictly controlled by the DNR and aren't naturally sustained. Coastal cities and towns will have it easier with fishing be actually feasible by most of the country is just fucked.The only people that will be able to "live off the land" will be living in the middle of fucking nowhere alaska or something like that. The vast majority of the population would be fucked, even people in towns of populations of a few thousand.
>>62914799Maybe it's just me but I feel as the decades go by, the more I hear a country like Russia or China or North Korea make threats about using their nukes, the less credible the threats are:It feels as if they're scared as shit and are trying to hide the true state of their nukes' capability to work at all if/when the time to actually use them comes.I mean, why the fuck is Russia is holding back from using their nukes in their own territory? This would be like letting South Korea invading North Korea and they aren't using their nukes to defend themselves:It's fucking insane!
>>62916242>Unfortunately, once the russians nuke ukraine, the west no longer has a choice, since like I said before repeatedly a failure to respond immediately leads to total devastation in the futureIncorrect. Ukraine does not have MAD. Neither we nor the Russians have pushed the button because both sides know that pushing the button ends our respective civilizations. Russia nuking Ukraine has no effect on that equation. Thus, because we are still constrained by the equation, we will not respond with nuclear weapons.
>>62916256>hate nafo >>hate natoSeems like there is some kind of distinction there my functionally illiterate friend.
>>62916257bang on anon, and this is the main issue, even if on paper there are resources left that could be organised to save a lot of people the situation is so beyond chaotic that if it’s on a large enough scale (all of NA and europe) then you end up with a sort of self-perpetuating chaos that cannot extinguish itself even if, like that guy said, you still technically have food and fuel and people with useful knowledge left around.To put it in different terms, look at hurricane katrina - a fucking shitshow of a humanitarian disaster that happened in a relatively localised section of the US. Did the hurricane kill everyone instantly? No, plenty of people (and food, and supplies) were about and you even had a whole ass government intact trying to get help into affected areas, and it still took forever to get the situation sorted. To this day there’s parts of Louisiana that haven’t recovered. And that was with the government intact. Now imagine katrina, but the federal and state government is completely MIA, it’s literally everywhere, and everything’s on fire. Shit would SUCK
>>62916256Whenever someone calls you guys out for being shills your immediate response is "NO YOU".It's like clockwork, so predictable. You really are a cancer on this board, I hope jannies start wrecking your shit again like they were last night. It was great watching you fuckers seethe.
>>62916265Do you not see how Russia nuking ukraine is a direct threat to the west which triggers MAD? >>62916271Well forgive me for inferring you saying liking NATO was cringe as meaning you didn’t like it
>>62916285Who exactly do you think I’m shilling for anon? Is it shilling to like NATO in 2024? Fucking hell
>>62916287liking NATO is cringe af
>>62916283Which is why nuclear strikes all focus on the same number of targets, the only thing that changes is how hard those select targets get hit. Its like 10 nukes on Dallas v 20 nukes on Dallas. Goal isnt to wipe out every grid square in a country, its to end the country as a functioning human organization. The actual total % of pop killed directly in a nuclear exchange, even including fallout will be like 1/4 of resultant deaths.
>>62916291nta but >both sides screeching >HOMG LOVE NATO Yeah, pretty obvious whats up. >>62916287>Do you not see how Russia nuking ukraine is a direct threat to the west which triggers MAD?No. >inferring you saying liking NATO was cringe as meaning you didn’t like itI don't like it, it is cringe - mainly because its obsolete. China is the threat. Russia is a generation away from irrelevance and Ukraine is merely an oppertunity to speed that up. The country itself holds no strategic significants. Frankly, if you adopt a truly America 1st position we want the Russians to capture everything east of the Dnieper so that Europe remains reliant on US/Saudi energy exports.
>>62916299See you do hate NATOPersonally I’m a big fan of the whole killing ziggers thing so I’m glad we have it around>>62916304You can argue there’s even a strategic advantage in leaving an enemy country’s civilian population largely alive whilst removing their infrastructure, communications and leadership. They’ll be eating each other and any attempted leaders by the end of the week, and even in an optimistic scenario where everyone doesn’t go full the road you’re giving whatever government survives the initial strikes a horrific humanitarian situation to deal with since 10 million refugees is much worse to deal with than 10 million bodies
>>62916332>Personally I’m a big fan of the whole killing ziggers thing so I’m glad we have it aroundonly redditfags use terms like zigger and holhol, thanks for confirming you're exactly the kind of dipshit I thought you were. genuinely hope there is a nuclear war at this point, too many retards proliferating. we need some really hard times to thin the herd and starve out the manlets.
>>62916318I’m not a shill, I genuinely just like NATO man. I think it’s the opposite of obsolete given russia seems insistent on doing their usual fuckery on the continent. Also that kind of “America 1st” policy is retarded, you’re fucking yourself in the long run.
>>62916338Where have you been anon? The word zigger tends to come up pretty frequently in discussions here, especially when something big blows up in Belgorod (Berdyansk is also currently on fire but check with your superiors on that)Are you calling /k/ reddit? Or is calling /k/ reddit ITSELF reddit? You tell me
>>62916340>seems insistent on doing their usual fuckery on the continent.They dont. Not even remotely. They arent retards anon. They know that if they are struggling with Ukraine the cant even conceive of what Europeans (by themselves) would do to Russia. >you’re fucking yourself in the long run.You're not. You're keeping Europe reliant on the US and the thoughts and feelings of the Ukrainian people (pop 37 million, economy smaller than Nebraskas) is irrelevant.
>>62916350he's calling you reddit, because that is where you're from. >the word comes up frequently! I do not dispute that it comes up frequently among you and your fellow travelers. >YOURE A RUSSIAN!Post guns.
>>62916357You’re a disappointment to the dream your country once had anon>>62916360Can’t post guns because I don’t own any. I want to move to the US in the long run to hopefully buy some since they’re not legal in a meaningful way in the UKWhether I own guns or not doesn’t change that you’re a retard
>>62916350this is not your home faggot, you are an unwanted migrant from reddit. filthy, dumb, reddit scum. you faggots have been shitting up this board for over a year and trying to change board culture with your cringe bumfight threads. no one cares, nor will they ever. post a gun you gunless faggot.>>62916360based noticer.
>>62916366God this is such pathetic shitflinging, can you samefaggers talk about something other than reddit?
>>62914936Wouldn't matter. America could end most of the Russian population with a handful of nukes and still have hundreds pointed at the rest of the thirdies.
>>62916372go to /pol/ you weiner you people never want to talk about weapons anyways
>>62916383I’ve been trying to talk about weapons in this thread the whole time but all I get are fuckheads calling me reddit Every damn thread just devolves into shitflinging here, no discussion. If you’re so convinced that this place is your rightful home, and not mine, then take better fucking care of it
>>62916391If you wanna talk about weapons we can talk about what platforms the russians would be most likely to use in a strike against ukraine, even if such a strike would never happen. Personally I’d assume one of their TU-95 launched missiles with a nuclear warhead, but I don’t actually know what kind of low yield warheads the russians have to work with.
>>62916391>actually I'm the victim in all of this!classic.
>>62916405I’m not saying I’m the victim. I’m saying /k/ is.
>>62916257>there's no place in america that has stockpiles of foodoh so it's a retard, nice same fag.
>>62916161>if russia hit ukraine and then the us hits inside of russia, russia will go all in.That's precisely why the US response to a Russian nuclear attack in Ukraine would likely be a full-scale first strike, because doing anything less than that merely gives the Russians the opportunity to launch everything and suddenly you go from an exchange that might have resulted in five million American deaths and the loss of 3-5 major cities at absolute worst (assuming that ABMs prove dramatically ineffective at stopping even a limited-scale exchange) to 50 million Americans dead, virtually every major city destroyed, and the entire country likely to collapse into civil war in the aftermath.
>>62915382>B61-12s hitting the majority of Russian and Belarusian tactical command structuresYou understand that a B-61 is a tactical nuclear weapon, right?
>>62915741Even if that's all true, you should probably program your scenarios around the idea that they DO still work
>>62916078Venezuela has one of the largest oil reserves on earth and they most likely wouldn't be nuked.
>>62916106>Remember I said "among the best places to ride it out" and not "you are gonna continue as if nothing's happened".I mean, it's not like a lot of people will be able to trek to brazil after they got nuked so while it won't be 100% the same...I could still play Xbox as long as the power is on (Xbox Live is gone though)
>>62916195>My side is America.Nta but mine too, and that means I live in a country that is treaty-bound to certain organizations and countries that I think are in America's best interests to maintain.
>>62915382Nigger, you don't talk down a man who just ordered unprovoked and unwarranted use of a nuclear weapon, you FUCKING KILL HIM and everyone in his inner circle who has power to order a launch.If he's already lost his marbles to the point where he was seriously willing to entertain breaking the nuclear taboo, then attempting to reason with him is a complete waste of time and only puts hundreds of millions of lives in imminent danger every second that you're allowing Russian military infrastructure to remain intact.And no, you can't cop out by destroying the Russian nuclear arsenal via conventional means because that takes too long. Too many targets, too many hours of flight time to penetrate Russian airspace to reach said targets, and too few available bombers.
>>62915892>neutralIn WW3...lol
>>62916287>Do you not see how Russia nuking ukraine is a direct threat to the west which triggers MAD?No. Not even remotely. >Well forgive me for inferring you saying liking NATO was cringe as meaning you didn’t like it>NATO>NAFO Reading is hard, huh?
>>62916659Life isnt a COD game.
>>62914799Game plan is to just outlast the majority of people in the area or last long enough stuff gets "fixed." Assuming my house isn't directly destroyed and the rivers near me don't become completely irradiated, I'll be ok for years if I manage to hide what I have so I don't get pillaged. I have an old bomb shelter from the 60s in the basement with thick concrete walls, enough water filters to filter like 10 years worth of drinking water (A years worth already stored), enough food for two years if I don't find a single morsel outside of my home, solar power system and various electronics in a faraday cage, along with all the other "minor" prepper stuff. If I didn't have to clean off/protect the solar panels and dump my waste outside I could just stay bunkered up completely for two years. Knowing my luck I'll be out of town if shit goes down.This isn't just for nuclear but whatever unexpected shit may go down. Realistically if you could bunker down a few weeks you'll be set in a lot of situations. You can get a months worth of food for one person for like $200 and water filter/55 gal storage for $150. Spend another hundred on a few other necessities and that $500 has you set for a month if you do it before you actually need it.
>>62916659FYI it was Joe Biden that authorized the use of long range tragical US missiles to be fired into Russia without congressional approval.
People in suburban / rural white America will be fine. All the food production, distribution / logistics utilities, etc are run by white people who will naturally and very quickly organize effort and do what needs to be done. There won’t be Mad Max. In fact it’ll be almost depressing how easily the system will continue functioning. Furthermore, the US can fully count on Europe to rush aid in (and vice versa) as needed. The West is not a peasant shithole run on slave labor and land rent. We all lived through COVID, and did any of us in the West hurt more than a fucking toilet paper shortage for a few weeks?
>>62916922>US can fully count on Europe to rush aidumm have you seen Europe lately LOL. they cannot fix themselves. that is like saying its OK doctor the crack head is here to help with brain surgery LOL
>>62916195>>62916221>>62916235>>>/pol/>>62916357>keeping europe reliant on the usThat ship already sailed, it'll take some years but pretty much every european government has set its course to independence, from MIC to pharmaceuticals. Do you think the green deal was meant to save the earth? Wrong, europe also wants energy independence from the US and russia now. They don't trust Trump and obviously don't trust thirdiestan.
>>62915870Holy pic...
>>62915092>Russia>deliberately targetThey'll blow up Belgorod and Voronezh
>>62916366>y-you're leddit!
>>62916922>People in suburban / rural white America will be fine.Except when you know, they>have fallout and pollutants kicked up from the bombs land in their fields>get inundated with refugees from the cities>have commerce completely dry up from major cities, which were both a supplier and customer of goods, and housed the major transportation networks, being destroyed>find the remaining roads impossible to travel without heavily armed escort due to banditry>suffer an overall massive decline in general standard of living as manufactured goods start to dry upFace it, rural America is just as screwed as urban America in a nuclear war, just on a longer timescale.
>>62917218>Forgetting about the indomitable human spiritBro I'll just hunt some deer while I homestead maize and use it to trade for my virgin tradwife in my all white Christian utopia
Sorry for being a retard as I just bumped into this thread; if NOOKs were launched whats stopping the US from finishing off other countries they consider enemies (N.Korea, China, French Polynesia) if the US knows its gonna get fucked up?
>>62917276That's typically why people worry about nuclear war. "In for a penny, in for a pound." Everyone assumes once that taboo is gone it's game on for everyone because everyone is friends or enemies with everyone else.
>>62917289It will be interesting to see what the world relations and diplomacy will be life afterwards, I wonder if all nooks will be used or if some will be saved as a backup until storages can be rebuilt.as an Australian I think i'll be okay but I fully support making a pacific empire
People (boomers and other old people) often seem to have a mentality that nuclear war would kill everyone and plunge the planet into 10k years of darkness even if any humans survive. Or some silly idea that we have enough nukes to actually DESTROY the entire fucking planet.On the other hand there are a lot of 'experts' like in this thread here who claim nuclear war is a myth and everything would be hunky dory.It's a boring answer but the truth probably lies somewhere in the middle. There would be large parts of the planet unaffected by war and most radiation would dissipate in 4 weeks. Sure it would forever change the geopolitical and ethnic landscape of the world with millions or even billions dying but it's not like the human species hasn't experienced such before.
>>62917218All these scenarios often seem to forget about mid-sized cities and towns that aren't within range of any nuclear target sites. I'm talking something up to 50k people (which are usually large enough to house things like a small military base, a mid-sized police force and their own jail).A competent crisis comnmitee could quickly seize control of the surrounding rural areas in what is effectively a feudal arrangement with the farms providing them with food.
>>62917325>People (boomers and other old people) often seem to have a mentality that nuclear war would kill everyone and plunge the planet into 10k years of darkness even if any humans survive.This idea was widely presented as fact by "intellectual" peaceniks (useful idiots to the Soviets) back in the day. People like Carl Sagan who straight up fabricated the whole nuclear winter theory as political propaganda to push for nuclear disarmament.
>>62914996Hand them sacks of grain and sit back and watch.
>>62915143He has no working nukes.
>>62915843The US strategy is escalate to de-escalate, if a nuke is fired towards the US they will retaliate with not 1 or 2 nukes but with around 80 of them. Yes hundreds of detonations have been recorded but they have been isolated cases not full on nuclear war. These detonations have also been conducted in areas where there's little to no material that will burn. The mushrooms clouds from nukes detonated at urban areas will carry the ash and soot into the atmosphere.
i had a house burn down once as a kidit was fucking terrible and a massive botherit took at least a year to get everything back together for my parentsnow, what happens when 1/2 of your countries' houses burn down and there's no support to get it all back together?
>>62917221You and every hick in a 10k town thinks they will be able to hunt the deer in the local reservoir. I know you're not a hunter because you would fucking know there aren't that many deer to be had. Their population has been kept in control for a hundred years and there just aren't that many of them. Not enough to feed 10k people for a week. Same for small game or fishing. Again, if you actually did any of these things you would know that most fishing spots are artificially stocked for recreation, not sustenance. The only people doing fishing are people on coastal towns or the people that already live off the land in the middle of fucking nowhere. Even they would be screwed because they rely on things like fuel for their ATVs and generators and shit.>>62917329I live in a farming town, and you don't just "collect food from farms." when 99% of it is corn grown for livestock. No one is growing large gardens that could provide for a town of 10k. These towns would be fucked even worse than larger ones because no one is going to drive supplies to them when fuel is a scarcity. Those walmarts and grocery stores will dry up in a day. No one has personal gardens and again, if nuclear war happens in like august you are waiting a year before you can grow any food. Farmers won't get fuel, they won't get seeds, they won't get workers, they won't get pesticides, they won't get fertilizer, they won't get shit.There will be some farms with viable food and livestock but they will last a year tops. Getting feed for livestock will be nearly impossible with little to no fuel
>>62914814>targets haven't included pop centersYou are technically correct, they are refered to as "production centers" in nuclear doctorine because generals in WW2 found politicians didn't like seeing "polulation center" or "city" on taget lists.
>>62916610B61 are variable yield. They can be strategic or tactical, they go up to 400kt.
>>62914799It would be extremely painful.
>>62919562You're a big guy.
>>62914799not as catastrophic as living in Ruskyi Mir
>>62916030forgot Threads
>>62914936This isn't very likely, and it's also somewhat irrelevant. The US sub leg and air leg of the triad will still be able to horrifically annihilate Russia. The very fact the air arm is located across several NATO ally nations also increases the likelihood Euro nations do get hit, which would make the two Euro nuclear states more likely to retaliate, anyway. Russia nuking anyone other than themselves invites a level of *genuine*, legitimate existential risk to Russia. Despite all the saber rattling, they know this, and their only bet is that somehow Western leadership is so weak that a literal nuclear strike would go unanswered by nations with everything to lose by *not* doing responding in-kind. Pure delirium.
