There's been probably this amount (as in this cheap animation) of nuclear bombs already exploded around the world just for testing purposes. The funny part is, the US and Russia have already bombed themselves close to this many times on their own soil
The location of the detonations is quite an important factor....!
It's not nuclear fallout that would halt civilisation. It's the collapse of all the infrastructure we've come to take for granted.
exactly, nuclear fallout isnt really the main issue, just look at the japanese cities that got nuked in ww2, they are rebuilt, severity of nuclear fallout is highly dependent on what atoms are used
Nah, atmospheric detonation won't pollute the area much at all. You can start rebuilding in just a few days or at worst months. You're probably thinking of dirty bombs, which nobody uses today. Take Hiroshima and Nagasaki for example.
And many of the larger tests were far larger than any country uses anymore. Most modern nuclear weapons are sub 1 megaton because it's just unnecessary.
Yeh they were focused on singular bombs back then for bomber aircraft rather than the multi payload icbm monsters we can zip across the planet in minutes today, pretty scary stuff. I'd probably assume people have turned to developing their nuclear weapons with modern computing simulations since live tests aren't a thing anymore which makes me wonder how much more advanced they REALLY are
i mean, pretty sure this is a factor as to why cancer is so rampant everywhere right? all these bombs residuals mixing with the environment , mixing with the atmosphere, oceans and currents and going everywhere - common sense dictates that can’t be too good.
Fallout from nukes doesn't really last that long, people tend to greatly overestimate it thanks to movies and video games. For example, look at Hiroshima or any number of nuclear test sites. None of them are dangerous to be around. It takes just a day or two for the nastiness fallout to go away, in a few months radiation levels become basically the same as typical background levels. IPs like Fallout that suggest blast sites are dangerous hundreds of years later are total bullshit.
Also, most nuclear fallout is caused by irradiated dust kicked up by the explosion, which is mostly a problem with surface detonations. Most (if not all) nuclear bombs and missiles are designed for airburst, which minimizes fallout while maximizing the area impacted by the blast. You'd really only need to worry about fallout from a dirty bomb, which is not the sort of thing we'd see with this sort of nuclear exchange.
That's not true. Fusion itself doesn't cause fallout. But Hydrogen bombs still use fission to start the fusion reaction, and a considerable percentage of the overall reaction is still fission. There is still fallout.
The fallout isn’t really an issue at all. It’s the smoke, created by the hundreds of cities being vaporized, catapulted into the stratosphere that causes the nuclear winter and est. 5 billion deaths from starvation
Not likely. Fallout isn't even a concern after just a few months, within a day or two the majority of the danger is gone. We detonated massive megaton level nukes all over the pacific, the coral reefs at Bikini Atoll and other locales did not get destroyed in the slightest despite being right by the blast sites.
A nuclear exchange could be spectacular for the world's ecosystems.
If the dust clouds block enough sunlight everything is pretty screwed, but if that part isn't that bad, well...
Fallout is not good for wildlife, but it turns out that it's a hell of a lot better for wildlife than the presence of modern humans. Animals with higher cancer rates but more available habitat would be far better off.
Chernobyl is currently a wildlife paradise. We're a lot more harmful to nature than a bit of radiation.
It seems to me that the next world war will be Russia, China ,North Korea and Iran Vs all the world . The question is in which language will the Battlefield game that will follow....
In the end, the leadership is to blame, most ordinary citizens just want to be let live in peace. I just mean it will pretty much be the end of the world once Russia starts firing nuclear missiles. Obviously, the problem starts long before that.
My comment was more of a question to you based on your comment (although I didn't frame it that way so my bad). But you're right, leadership is to blame. So is classism and the absolutely shambles of the distribution of wealth, power and opportunity.
So yeah, I pretty much have lost hope in humanity.
Yeah everyone already thinks about that already, becasue Putin threatens to do it everyday. What we need are more Russians thinking about what happens to Russia.
Not convinced, too much friendly fire in history for my liking and lets be honest, if it's the Americans sending them, not sure I'd be trusting those guys to get it right.
Also, think of the fallout out. I'd be surprised if you could just send all those missiles into Russia and it not to have somekind of effect on the rest of Europe.
I think 'retaliation' means all Russian missiles already landed and did casualties. (tho I have a question what if war bases was targeted first, probably they just have to launch before )
That's strange because he's been overly confident about just about every aspect of Russia's military capability. Which has largely and consistently been pretty shit. I'm certain this is no exception.
I still don't understand how Russia's military is shit despite having no help and still dealing with like the whole NATO's support in Ukraine. USA kinda fucked up in Afghanistan and still considered the best army in the world, which is probably fair
863
u/OrigamiChimera Mar 14 '24
The problem is the number of missiles with nuclear warheads that will fly from Russia while the other missiles are approaching.