What is the most realistic situation for the use of nuclear weaponry in the next couple of decades? For sake of the argument, assume that world ending “everyone launches” is out of the question. Do you think we might see tactical use in Ukraine? Will NorthKorea go crazy?
>>537183823Putin can't use nukes, it'd be too embarrassing. The war was supposed to end in a few days.I feel like Afghanistan or something would most likely be nuked.
Nukes aren't real.
israel
>>537184008>Afghanistan By who? If it’s too embarrassing for Russia to nuke Ukraine, would it not be five times more for America to nuke the desert? >>537184108As in they use nukes or are nuked? >>537184055What happened to Hiroshima? All witness report a single plane and single bomb
nukes are overrated. Japan houses were made out of paper in Hiroshima and Niggersaki. + nothing ever happens.
Fire bombed. Witnesses were all crisis actors.
>>537184192as in they use nukes. Their policy is literally if we lose we throw a nuclear temper tantrumIf only they got nuked
>>537184192I think America might be the least likely to nuke Afghanistan among India, Pakistan, Israel, Russia, and China. Point is there are many reasons for many nuclear nations to nuke Afghanistan.
>>537183823>give science jews a shit load of money>they create the biggest baddest weapon of all time>you can’t ever see them>you can’t ever hear about them unless you’re being blackmailed by them>you’re not allowed to know anything about them unless it’s for blackmail>nukes are real tho goy>fear them
>>537183823>What is the most realistic situation for the use of nuclear weaponryYou just wake up from told to you lie.Fear with Nuclear Weaponshttps://youtu.be/MkB0n8tk-FAhttps://odysee.com/@RaHoWarrior:0/How-The-Yid-Stole-Christmas:f
>>537184316I don’t think that is realistic, but okay. I feel like any of those nations would just conventional bombing.
>>537184394>>537184503This is very new to me. I did not realize people thought nukes were fake. What do you make of the test footage that was made before CGI was a thing?
>>537184601Please don't engage that retard.
>>537184254Okay, what about the higher cancer rates among Hiroshima survivors compared to the firebomb victims in other cities?
>>537184545Ditto but you asked about nukes. If you want a more realistic answer then I'll just say that there will be no nuclear warfare in the next couple of decades.
>>537184733Right, nuclear warfare in my head is the big powers engaging mad. In my head, the use of smaller tactical nukes that don’t trigger mad aren’t really nuclear warfare. You believe there is no chance for such a situation where a nuke is used in a regional war and it does not trigger international MAD? Even in your situation, if India nukes Afghanistan, I don’t think America and Russia start launching at each other.
>>537184730Dirty (fire) bombs
I think there is a non zero chance Israel uses nukes. And when this happens Putin would likely see it as precedent for him to use them in Ukraine. And then all bets are off.
>>537184929Dirty with what?
>>537184601(CGI) Pictures illustrates suggested to imagine fantasy.Photography is a light drowning, documented view at that time.
>>537184832>You believe there is no chance for such a situation where a nuke is used in a regional war and it does not trigger international MAD?Double negatives make this a bit hard to parse but I'll say yes.>if India nukes Afghanistan, I don’t think America and Russia start launching at each other.I agree.
>>537183823I i agine it'll be someone unexpected like one of those shitty African countries. Itll be a hunk of junk low yield dirty bomb.Thats my guess
>>537183823Trump wants to nuke hurricanea but dismantled the hurricane monitoring equipment.
>>537184008What the fuck are you going to nuke in Afghanistan? And why?
>>537185052I just mean that everyone seems to think it is impossible for a nuclear weapon to be used without triggering MAD. I don’t think that is the case.
>>537185043These blurry "giant" pictures are so fucking gay
>>537183823Unironically a conflict between India and Pakistan It will cause the Great Flush
>>537183823>tactical usethis is absolutely nothing compared to the strategic ones. Like a fart.
>>537185201I agree. I think in certain situations MAD makes sense but not universally.
>>537185306Okay. Are you standing by your post that the most realistic situation where nukes are used in the next few decades is one where some nation nukes Afghanistan?
>>537185291That’s why I believe tactical nukes will not trigger world wide MAD
>>537185306I think MAD is pretty retarded in practice. It only makes sense as long as it doesn't happen. The bad thing is happening and the last thing you want people to remember you by is X2ing the bad thing.
>>537185439Well again the most realistic situation I think is that no nukes will be used in the next few decades. But if they are then yes I think Afghanistan is a good guess given what we know now. If not then I think maybe some other Middle Eastern country.
>>537185535That’s kinda the whole point. It prevents itself by threatening itself.
>>537185671Nukes will never be used unless the other side uses them first. Every country has like a de facto no-first use police
>>537184601Go watch those videos againThe houses aren’t realHow did the camera survive?It’s all clear as day
>>537185812China and India are the only countries with no first use policies. Every other nuclear power does not. I would also be doubtful of India and China dedication to such a policy.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_first_use
Irradiating the entire Middle Eastern desert purely to spite Israel when they inevitably attempt a USS Liberty 2.0 after merging with the US Military is how I'd like to see things go
>>537185925The cameras are miles away and use mirror stations to focus on their targets.
>>537183823The most obvious situation would be that Israel nukes one of it's allies as a false flag, gets caught doing it and then the Worlds nuclear powers finally realise that the real existential threat to humanity is the jews and their anti-human, barbaric, demonic, tribal creed of perversion religion and totally obliterate Israel and the jewish demons from the surface of the Earth with Thermonuclear Armageddon.Everyone knows the real threat is the jews having nukes. It's time we stopped beating around the bush and start to face reality.TKD and their enablers is the only thing that will save the World.
>>537185812Except Israel
>>537183823Nukes are just not worth it today.Moral bombing is off the table and they have little to none tactical use on the battlefield. And it would make you a lot of enemys with the big possibility of retaliation strikes.
the "korean" is an obvious shillnukes don't exist
>>537186119유럽인들은 조용히 있어야 합니다
>>537184055Why? Nukes are not that hard to engineer if you are not sanctioned by most of the world. They are actually so easy to produce that the Soviet Union used them for building projects. The rockets are a different problem but dropping a nuke from a plane is not that hard.
>>537185986I don’t knowAsk Stanley Kubrick
>>537187175I know you don’t know, fucktard
>>537187623You don’t eitherYou don’t know anything
>>537183823I think Russia is going to nuke Ukraine because they keep sending drones to Moscow. It will probably be a single small nuke targeting the core of Ukraine industrial sector.
>>537185927That’s why I said “de facto” you retarded gook insect.
>>537187756다음 햄버거를 목에 걸세요>>537187792When it comes to nukes, I don’t think de facto applies, nigger. If it’s not in writing, you have to assume they’ll use first if existentially threatened
>>537187874>spam pasting prior posts to other anonsKek
>>537189054>spam pasting prior posts What the actual fuck does this mean
>>537189659poltards just can't comprehend someone who hasn't completely given up on the concept of reality and is engaging critically with a subject.
>>537183823>For sake of the argument, assume that world ending “everyone launches” is out of the question.OK, how about a more limited launch of mini nukes to advertise Season 6 of Fallout?
1. america launching effectively ends NPT:- every shithole country will be buying briefcase nukes from Russia/China/NorthKorea.2. stratageic nukes will never be fired- tactical nukes only3. we're safe; only 20% chance of above every happening.
>>537190235>every shithole country will be buying briefcase nukes from Russia/China/NorthKorea.Do these countries have an incentive to selling to nonnuclear powers given what their use might mean for international relations
>>537183823Honest question, do people in south korea fall for the north korea propaganda. North Korea literally will do nothing without Chinas permission, if they ever attack you, you know China told them to go die for them, simple as...
>>537190347Which propaganda are you speaking of? I’d say no in general, but maybe there is some specific piece you’re thinking of.
Last and only time nukes were used-in war-was when japan was too stubborn to surrender.So it seems like nukes are used as a "final solution"Who are the most stubborn military powers that would refuse to capitulate in a losing war?Ofc the stubborn war powers all have nukes as well so the question becomes which one of the stubborn powers would actually go through with mutually assured destruction rather than surrender and accepting defeat?We know israel has the samson option .nukes are gay.Youd be better off sprinkling radioactive dust over the cities rather than bombing them.Maybe wed use nukes on mars to create a "stronger atmosphere"
>>537183823Usa wanting to test them.
>>537183823Israhell !!!Next question!
>>537183823Pakistan nuking something close to the border with India would be my guess. India is set up for a mass starvation event and economic collapse. They don't have the fuel to get out by plane or boat, so the inevitable wave of refugees will have to footslog it to a neighboring country. The sheer population size of India makes any exodus like this an existential threat to their neighbors, a refugee wave of 100 million people fleeing India on foot would be less than 1% of their population, but would be a complete disaster for anyone in their path. If 100 million Indians try to enter Pakistan to avoid starvation, Pakistan is going to shoot on sight. If the human wave becomes too big, they could drop a nuke to try and scare the Indian's away from the border and convince them to go somewhere else.
>>537183823No one actually has nukes, Anon-sama.
>>537190843If I’m glad of posting today it is because I’ve learned of a new retard conspiracy.
>>537190687All nuclear powers do non-explosive testing of their nukes by checking neutron counts. That obviously doesn’t count.
>>537190322> Do these countries have an incentive to selling to nonnuclear powersINITIAL======NPT was enforced by:1. US military primacy (US police)2. US economic primacy3. global member "buy-in", that we don't want it around, and threat of global "shunning"/"isolation". threat of global-"police" (not US police)RECENT HISTORY==============- Libiya gave up nukes; gadaffi got overthrown- DPRK kept nukes; MSM treat DPRK as forbidden-subject- Trump threatens tac-nukes (even he won't use strategics)ANALYSIS========- US military primacy is still here but not seen as infallible. (much of it is due to how it's used as opposed to raw firepower)- US economic primacy no longer exists (de-dollarization means it's impossible to sanction countries in future)- global-police comes from 'moral highground'. nuke-deployment means no-benefits in staying nuke-freeCONCLUSION============US or ANYONE using nukes will mean a stampede to suitcase nukes for every nation - in africa, south-america, far-east.
>>537183823ziggers nuke kiev and other cities
>>537191292>>537190322> Do these countries have an incentive to selling to nonnuclear powersmy badtl;dr'rogue states" will say: if everyone has nukes, they can't isolate me for being a nuclear power.nukes are used as 'defensive weapons' (m.a.d.)the first country using it as an offiensive weapon makes owning one, "essential"nuclear powers don't sell it cos of NPTexample.- Russia DGAF if colombia/mexico have nukes.- China DGAF is Africa have nukes.
>>537183823Trump will set off a surplus nuke for the 250 July 4th celebrations simply because he can. World's biggest firecracker!
>>537191528>>537191292 >>537190322>> Do these countries have an incentive to selling to nonnuclear powersDPRK might even find it funny, if MiddleEast has nukes, considering only power is Israel atm.
>>537191795Is this a copypastaP sure ive seen this exact post before
>>537192054>Is this a copypastanope (no to my knowledge)- it might have been brought up in the past(IDK), but "it's relevant again"?- Israel's nukes in the middle-east isn't exactly a new subject.
>>537193443>>537192054> dprk: when everyone's a rogue state, no one will be.
>>537183823They likely won't be used based on historical precedent. Pre-WWII, people were extremely worried about the usage of chemical weapons in another WW because all of the countries that would be involved had massive chemical weapons stockpile, but neither the Germans nor the Soviets used them first on the battlefield (despite it being a war of extermination/survival respectively) because they knew it lead to mutually assured chemical destruction.That being said, it's better to be safe than sorry.
>>537183823Most likely some corrupted military men selling their nukes to terrorists/criminals/anarchists.....and those have no regrets to use them.
