User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 2:12:09 AM EST
[#1]
Oh fuck that Vlad guy. Between him or that fat Korean kid with the skyrockets, I don't know who acts the dumber.
 Now the Iranians?... those people are are nuts and should NEVER get nukes or we will die needlessly. We're all going to die someday. Have faith that there is something other then death, and you will worry less over ego maniacs like Vlad! In the meantime, God Bless the proud and courageous Ukrainians who will ultimately win. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 2:16:24 AM EST
[#2]
Quoted: Putin is many things, high functioning sociopath for instance, but he is not stupid. He is going to do what he thinks is in his best interests. people keep saying this but I'm going to argue that he is already way the fuck outside of "his best interest" His only hope of making it out of this in way that doesn't look just completely terrible is hoping Biden out stupids him in the inevitable peace talks that some how we are a part of. IMHO I don't think he expected to world to react the way it has. But a lot of these sanctions and the fact that their currency is about to be completely worthless is going to make a lot of his rich buddies really dislike him in a quick hurry. Fucking with the Russia mob doesn't seem like something a smart person would do. Quoted: So in other words most Democrats would be perfectly happy with that outcome. I kind doubt that. Depending on what targets Putin goes after in a potential strike, you have to assume that at least some of them will be key cities such as NYC, Chicago, LA, San Fran, DC etc. I kinda don't see democrats being thrilled about being vaporized. Its almost a certainty that most of the population killed in a nuke strike will be left leaning. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 2:16:31 AM EST
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm sure Tulsi is furiously at her keyboard writing for the 100th time that we need to capitulate and suck Russia's dick every time nukes come into the discussion. Says the guy who advocated capitulating on gun control becaue you're afraid that if we don't give up SOMETHING...then the Dems will take everything. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 2:33:49 AM EST
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is so absolutely stupid that I can't stop reading it. Each time I read it, I hope that I've read it wrong, and it's not as retarded as the previous time, but it's actually even more retarded with each reading. I'm not even sure how someone who's old enough to have access to the internet processed something so stupid. I truly hope you don't have any firearms under your control. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: 500 nukes would be a minor hiccup. There is too much land area in the USA, the industries are too spread out, for even 10,000 nukes to "destroy the US". 10,000 nukes could maybe destroy >50% of Texas industry. If those 500 are aimed at population centers, all you'll do is kill off the weaklings. The remaining Americans will then be out to eat your children. I truly hope you don't have any firearms under your control.  Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 3:12:55 AM EST
[#5]
yeah they have one trick that will cause their own eradication, very impressive.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 3:35:41 AM EST
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Do Portland first. I hope you meant Oregon. People seem to forget Portland, Maine. It’s not my fault the west coast bitches stole our name. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 8:48:01 AM EST
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So in the legendary clusterfuck among clusterfucks in a blue run area you get..... some violence. Meanwhile anywhere that isn't a deep leftist hellhole has zero crime during disasters. Jackson, MS would be a hoot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 8:52:27 AM EST
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: 500 nukes would be a minor hiccup. There is too much land area in the USA, the industries are too spread out, for even 10,000 nukes to "destroy the US". 10,000 nukes could maybe destroy >50% of Texas industry. If those 500 are aimed at population centers, all you'll do is kill off the weaklings. The remaining Americans will then be out to eat your children. I truly hope you don't have any firearms under your control. /media/mediaFiles/sharedAlbum/vladimir-putin-laughing_zpsov82lsef_GIF-129.gif It just goes to show you how deep the anti-nuke propaganda goes. These hoopleheads have been indoctrinated from birth that a nuclear explosion is a magical death ray 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 8:53:57 AM EST
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It is easy even by GD standards to tell who knows jack shit about nukes and who doesn't when they open their drooling mouths. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The hysteria, panic, handwringing, and ignorance would take care of what the nukes don't. There's been a mythology built up over decades that nukes are some sort of magical death potion. Quoted: Each one of those dots is a much, much smaller land area than is depicted. The concentrations around the silos would be the main source of fallout. Everywhere else would bounce back quickly once people put aside their sackcloth and ashes. It is easy even by GD standards to tell who knows jack shit about nukes and who doesn't when they open their drooling mouths. Yeah, we know you don't have any substance to offer, so keep up with the insults princess. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 8:57:59 AM EST
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Skillshot is right. How much do you happen to know about nuclear weapon effects and launch systems? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: This is so absolutely stupid that I can't stop reading it. Each time I read it, I hope that I've read it wrong, and it's not as retarded as the previous time, but it's actually even more retarded with each reading. I'm not even sure how someone who's old enough to have access to the internet processed something so stupid. I truly hope you don't have any firearms under your control. Skillshot is right. How much do you happen to know about nuclear weapon effects and launch systems? Thank you, finally another smart person. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 8:59:18 AM EST
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It just goes to show you how deep the anti-nuke propaganda goes. These hoopleheads have been indoctrinated from birth that a nuclear explosion is a magical death ray 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 9:00:35 AM EST
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's stuff like this that makes me think Putin has just lost his mind and should be taken seriously. This isn't the rhetoric of a rational actor. I could definitely see him letting some canned sunshine out if he's playing this war as a battle for his country's survival. The guy had been looking at the data and numbers for decades and sees its only getting worse for the motherland. He had another option. Open up the ecconomy..create a Constitution..and the people would have flooded in. Instead he chose to try amd manage a failing system and it may actually have driven him insane. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 9:06:04 AM EST
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Russia could also be destroyed France and the UK also have some canned sunshine as does Israel..we ain't afraid Vlad There are no "winners" in a full-scale nuclear exchange. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 9:09:12 AM EST
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's stuff like this that makes me think Putin has just lost his mind and should be taken seriously. This isn't the rhetoric of a rational actor. I could definitely see him letting some canned sunshine out if he's playing this war as a battle for his country's survival. Then again, this might be an example of a "Nice world you gots there. Would be a shame if something bad happened to it." talk by a 1950s Noo Joisey Mafioso. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 9:28:32 AM EST
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: A pic of Hiroshima after Little Boy. Current Russian SLBM warheads are up to 10 times as powerful. Stop acting like it's a pillow fight. https://media2.s-nbcnews.com/j/newscms/2016_21/1551436/ss-160525-hiroshima-bombing-archive-09_d907b4e7e6fc0061aec814a14c1bed50.nbcnews-ux-2880-1000.jpg What are you saying, we only need one to hit Portland? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 9:35:25 AM EST
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: A pic of Hiroshima after Little Boy. Current Russian SLBM warheads are up to 10 times as powerful. Stop acting like it's a pillow fight. https://media2.s-nbcnews.com/j/newscms/2016_21/1551436/ss-160525-hiroshima-bombing-archive-09_d907b4e7e6fc0061aec814a14c1bed50.nbcnews-ux-2880-1000.jpg Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: It just goes to show you how deep the anti-nuke propaganda goes. These hoopleheads have been indoctrinated from birth that a nuclear explosion is a magical death ray A pic of Hiroshima after Little Boy. Current Russian SLBM warheads are up to 10 times as powerful. Stop acting like it's a pillow fight. https://media2.s-nbcnews.com/j/newscms/2016_21/1551436/ss-160525-hiroshima-bombing-archive-09_d907b4e7e6fc0061aec814a14c1bed50.nbcnews-ux-2880-1000.jpg Ok, and you stop acting like it's magic death. Bombs are bigger, but buildings are stronger. Most of those buildings were wooden stick structures. It's one reason that Japanese cities responded so well to firebombing attacks. Russia can throw 300kt bombs around, but to DESTROY the USA, it's going to take a shitton of them. A metric fuckload. In other words, a lot. I don't think many people appreciate how much industry this country has. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 9:41:57 AM EST
[#17]
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 9:46:24 AM EST
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Do Portland first. Nick |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 9:46:53 AM EST
[#19]
Fucking Russians, they know for a fact that if that happen, it will be the end for every body.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 9:47:22 AM EST
[#20]
The Soviet Union (and the subsequent Russian Federation) has always asserted their survival in a nuclear exchange.
They will distribute rain gear; just as they did their nuclear sub, K-19. The gear is reported to be bulletproof, too. Reality matters little if the truth is unknown. I have zero trust in their (or our) narrative. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 9:51:13 AM EST
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If the western world could learn to live without consuming all the natural gas it does maybe just half or so, we could not buy a drop from Russia. Russia without an energy market = collapsed |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 9:53:35 AM EST
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Look... Vlad... To prove your point why dont you hit LA, SF, and Portland to show us you're serious. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 9:55:14 AM EST
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Ok, and you stop acting like it's magic death. Bombs are bigger, but buildings are stronger. Most of those buildings were wooden stick structures. It's one reason that Japanese cities responded so well to firebombing attacks. Russia can throw 300kt bombs around, but to DESTROY the USA, it's going to take a shitton of them. A metric fuckload. In other words, a lot. I don't think many people appreciate how much industry this country has. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 9:56:54 AM EST
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It just goes to show you how deep the anti-nuke propaganda goes. These hoopleheads have been indoctrinated from birth that a nuclear explosion is a magical death ray Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 500 nukes would be a minor hiccup. There is too much land area in the USA, the industries are too spread out, for even 10,000 nukes to "destroy the US". 10,000 nukes could maybe destroy >50% of Texas industry. If those 500 are aimed at population centers, all you'll do is kill off the weaklings. The remaining Americans will then be out to eat your children. I truly hope you don't have any firearms under your control. /media/mediaFiles/sharedAlbum/vladimir-putin-laughing_zpsov82lsef_GIF-129.gif It just goes to show you how deep the anti-nuke propaganda goes. These hoopleheads have been indoctrinated from birth that a nuclear explosion is a magical death ray Well, 9/11 resulted in 3000 deaths, caused all plane travel to stop, and had a huge impact that has caused ripples in the world still occurring today. So, I'd say that losing lets say, 150,000 people per city x idk 350 nukes = 52,500,000 people potentially killed within a pretty short time. That's probably conservative considering people are much more densely packed into urban areas now than in 1940's Japan. what's the radioactive fallout like from several hundred locations around the country? Compare this to say, the traditional bombing going on in Ukraine. How many Ukrainians have been killed? How has this impacted their country thus far? I'm struggling to see how the U.S. being nuked in a full scale nuclear strike, something of a magnitude like a thousand times worse than what's happening in Ukraine, or wars in Iraq or Syria, is something perceive as, "ho hum, nukes aren't death rays, factories would keep working fine, rural folk would survive, it'll just muss our hair." That makes about as much sense as being like, "well, the bullets only struck my heart, my brain, my kidneys, and my lugs, but most of the tissue is still there, and like 95% of my physical body is still intact, look, there's just little holes on the outside, so...this is fine." |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 10:00:00 AM EST
[#25]
Assuming I am far enough away from metro NYC to survive an initial attack, my freshly installed batteries are good to go
(I love good quality military surplus that I am able to repair):  |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 10:03:10 AM EST
[#26]
gee, if your missile doors are opening you better listen for that faint woosh and whine in the water......
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 10:03:57 AM EST
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Who has the nuke meme of the dude saying why is the sun rising during night?  Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 10:13:09 AM EST
[#28]
From The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.
https://thebulletin.org/premium/2022-02/nuclear-notebook-how-many-nuclear-weapons-does-russia-have-in-2022/ "As of early 2022, we estimate that Russia has a stockpile of approximately 4,477 nuclear warheads assigned for use by long-range strategic launchers and shorter-range tactical nuclear forces, which is a slight decrease from last year. Of the stockpiled warheads, approximately 1,588 strategic warheads are deployed: about 812 on land-based ballistic missiles, about 576 on submarine-launched ballistic missiles, and possibly 200 at heavy bomber bases. Approximately another 977 strategic warheads are in storage, along with about 1,912 nonstrategic warheads. In addition to the military stockpile for operational forces, a large number—approximately 1,500—of retired but still largely intact warheads await dismantlement, for a total inventory of approximately 5,977 warheads.1 (See Table 1)." 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 10:23:05 AM EST
[#29]
Well, a few of them in the wrong places would make us regret getting involved in this shift for quite some time. We need Reagan or Kennedy right about now it scares me more due to who we do have than what Putin said then gets posted on Twitter.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 10:25:33 AM EST
[#30]
Well, if it happens, vaporize me. The alternative is worse.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 10:29:58 AM EST
[#31]
Quote HistoryNow with extra special goodness. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 10:34:26 AM EST
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Well, 9/11 resulted in 3000 deaths, caused all plane travel to stop, and had a huge impact that has caused ripples in the world still occurring today. So, I'd say that losing lets say, 150,000 people per city x idk 350 nukes = 52,500,000 people potentially killed within a pretty short time. That's probably conservative considering people are much more densely packed into urban areas now than in 1940's Japan. what's the radioactive fallout like from several hundred locations around the country? Compare this to say, the traditional bombing going on in Ukraine. How many Ukrainians have been killed? How has this impacted their country thus far? I'm struggling to see how the U.S. being nuked in a full scale nuclear strike, something of a magnitude like a thousand times worse than what's happening in Ukraine, or wars in Iraq or Syria, is something perceive as, "ho hum, nukes aren't death rays, factories would keep working fine, rural folk would survive, it'll just muss our hair." That makes about as much sense as being like, "well, the bullets only struck my heart, my brain, my kidneys, and my lugs, but most of the tissue is still there, and like 95% of my physical body is still intact, look, there's just little holes on the outside, so...this is fine." Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 500 nukes would be a minor hiccup. There is too much land area in the USA, the industries are too spread out, for even 10,000 nukes to "destroy the US". 10,000 nukes could maybe destroy >50% of Texas industry. If those 500 are aimed at population centers, all you'll do is kill off the weaklings. The remaining Americans will then be out to eat your children. I truly hope you don't have any firearms under your control. /media/mediaFiles/sharedAlbum/vladimir-putin-laughing_zpsov82lsef_GIF-129.gif It just goes to show you how deep the anti-nuke propaganda goes. These hoopleheads have been indoctrinated from birth that a nuclear explosion is a magical death ray Well, 9/11 resulted in 3000 deaths, caused all plane travel to stop, and had a huge impact that has caused ripples in the world still occurring today. So, I'd say that losing lets say, 150,000 people per city x idk 350 nukes = 52,500,000 people potentially killed within a pretty short time. That's probably conservative considering people are much more densely packed into urban areas now than in 1940's Japan. what's the radioactive fallout like from several hundred locations around the country? Compare this to say, the traditional bombing going on in Ukraine. How many Ukrainians have been killed? How has this impacted their country thus far? I'm struggling to see how the U.S. being nuked in a full scale nuclear strike, something of a magnitude like a thousand times worse than what's happening in Ukraine, or wars in Iraq or Syria, is something perceive as, "ho hum, nukes aren't death rays, factories would keep working fine, rural folk would survive, it'll just muss our hair." That makes about as much sense as being like, "well, the bullets only struck my heart, my brain, my kidneys, and my lugs, but most of the tissue is still there, and like 95% of my physical body is still intact, look, there's just little holes on the outside, so...this is fine." Nah, it's more like, "I have a GDP of 21,000 billion dollars and 0.5% of my population wants to exterminate you. You just shot your entire load and now I have a GDP of 20,000 billion dollars and now 85% of my population wants to exterminate you." It would take a mind-boggling amount of ordinance to "destroy" the USA. The planes were grounded because of uncertainty surrounding the attack and not because of a physical reason. But you know this. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 10:50:34 AM EST
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Nah, it's more like, "I have a GDP of 21,000 billion dollars and 0.5% of my population wants to exterminate you. You just shot your entire load and now I have a GDP of 20,000 billion dollars and now 85% of my population wants to exterminate you." It would take a mind-boggling amount of ordinance to "destroy" the USA. The planes were grounded because of uncertainty surrounding the attack and not because of a physical reason. But you know this. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 500 nukes would be a minor hiccup. There is too much land area in the USA, the industries are too spread out, for even 10,000 nukes to "destroy the US". 10,000 nukes could maybe destroy >50% of Texas industry. If those 500 are aimed at population centers, all you'll do is kill off the weaklings. The remaining Americans will then be out to eat your children. I truly hope you don't have any firearms under your control. /media/mediaFiles/sharedAlbum/vladimir-putin-laughing_zpsov82lsef_GIF-129.gif It just goes to show you how deep the anti-nuke propaganda goes. These hoopleheads have been indoctrinated from birth that a nuclear explosion is a magical death ray Well, 9/11 resulted in 3000 deaths, caused all plane travel to stop, and had a huge impact that has caused ripples in the world still occurring today. So, I'd say that losing lets say, 150,000 people per city x idk 350 nukes = 52,500,000 people potentially killed within a pretty short time. That's probably conservative considering people are much more densely packed into urban areas now than in 1940's Japan. what's the radioactive fallout like from several hundred locations around the country? Compare this to say, the traditional bombing going on in Ukraine. How many Ukrainians have been killed? How has this impacted their country thus far? I'm struggling to see how the U.S. being nuked in a full scale nuclear strike, something of a magnitude like a thousand times worse than what's happening in Ukraine, or wars in Iraq or Syria, is something perceive as, "ho hum, nukes aren't death rays, factories would keep working fine, rural folk would survive, it'll just muss our hair." That makes about as much sense as being like, "well, the bullets only struck my heart, my brain, my kidneys, and my lugs, but most of the tissue is still there, and like 95% of my physical body is still intact, look, there's just little holes on the outside, so...this is fine." Nah, it's more like, "I have a GDP of 21,000 billion dollars and 0.5% of my population wants to exterminate you. You just shot your entire load and now I have a GDP of 20,000 billion dollars and now 85% of my population wants to exterminate you." It would take a mind-boggling amount of ordinance to "destroy" the USA. The planes were grounded because of uncertainty surrounding the attack and not because of a physical reason. But you know this. Duuuuuuuuuude, come on, the Boston Marathon bombers caused a whole city to grind to a halt.  You think a massively nuked U.S. wouldn't be countless times worse? Do you think the grocery stores would stay stocked, the utilities in all those cities would stay running, clean water keeps flowing, everyone just goes to work, dons a gas mask, and works double time to make up for their dead co-worker, and their vaporized upper management? Comeeee onnnnn, you're being.png/800px-Obtuse_angle_(geometry).png)
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 11:01:17 AM EST
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Man come on, can this shit wait til I finish Elden Ring? Wait for the graphics for the next Fallout game. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 11:27:37 AM EST
[#35]
It'd suck if NewYork, D.C. , Chicago, L.A. , etc. were to get hit ,no joke. They don't need to destroy as much as that to grind this whole country to a halt. Shut enough of the power grid down and most of the continental U.S. is dark. Remember that weird power failure that shut off a lot of the midwest and part of Canada even? They we're able to reset and get it back pretty quick, I bet they wouldn't if the power plants, substations are actually wiped out. It'd probably take years. We have high gas prices right now but how much of that refining and distribution system can go down before we have none? If Russia launched 10% of it's weaponry we'd have to be 100% in stopping it or else life here will will get very difficult. We better know where every one of those subs are, and what they are doing. And we better give Putin a pretty short amount of time to head the damn things back to port or else we'll put them on the bottom. I doubt we have a comander in chief or joint chiefs with enough brains or balls to do that right now.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 11:37:43 AM EST
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm not acting like it's magic death. Yes, much of Hiroshima was of wood construction. But even the concrete buildings were damaged. One nuke in one city would kill a lot of people and destroy a lot of infrastructure. And over the last two years we've seen how society reacts to something they can't see that can kill them or make them sick. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Ok, and you stop acting like it's magic death. Bombs are bigger, but buildings are stronger. Most of those buildings were wooden stick structures. It's one reason that Japanese cities responded so well to firebombing attacks. Russia can throw 300kt bombs around, but to DESTROY the USA, it's going to take a shitton of them. A metric fuckload. In other words, a lot. I don't think many people appreciate how much industry this country has. I'm not acting like it's magic death. Yes, much of Hiroshima was of wood construction. But even the concrete buildings were damaged. One nuke in one city would kill a lot of people and destroy a lot of infrastructure. And over the last two years we've seen how society reacts to something they can't see that can kill them or make them sick. Well the good news is that you can definitively test for radiation, on the spot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 11:47:23 AM EST
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It'd suck if NewYork, D.C. , Chicago, L.A. , etc. were to get hit ,no joke. They don't need to destroy as much as that to grind this whole country to a halt. Shut enough of the power grid down and most of the continental U.S. is dark. Remember that weird power failure that shut off a lot of the midwest and part of Canada even? They we're able to reset and get it back pretty quick, I bet they wouldn't if the power plants, substations are actually wiped out. It'd probably take years. We have high gas prices right now but how much of that refining and distribution system can go down before we have none? If Russia launched 10% of it's weaponry we'd have to be 100% in stopping it or else life here will will get very difficult. We better know where every one of those subs are, and what they are doing. And we better give Putin a pretty short amount of time to head the damn things back to port or else we'll put them on the bottom. I doubt we have a comander in chief or joint chiefs with enough brains or balls to do that right now. don't know if this still holds but east-west telephone communications used to flow through a hub in the loop of Chicago. My dad had a contract on the rebar for the building in the mid to late-sixties. I'm sure there have been serious changes since then but there is a hell of a lot of electronic communications in and out of the Board of Trade in Chicago to say nothing about financial and corporate communications such as Boeing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 11:55:18 AM EST
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Well the good news is that you can definitively test for radiation, on the spot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 12:10:17 PM EST
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Duuuuuuuuuude, come on, the Boston Marathon bombers caused a whole city to grind to a halt. https://static.infowars.com/2013/04/i/general/bead.jpg You think a massively nuked U.S. wouldn't be countless times worse? Do you think the grocery stores would stay stocked, the utilities in all those cities would stay running, clean water keeps flowing, everyone just goes to work, dons a gas mask, and works double time to make up for their dead co-worker, and their vaporized upper management? Comeeee onnnnn, you're being https://www.tau.ac.il/~tsirel/dump/Static/knowino.org/w/images/thumb/2/26/Obtuse_angle_(geometry).png/800px-Obtuse_angle_(geometry).png Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 500 nukes would be a minor hiccup. There is too much land area in the USA, the industries are too spread out, for even 10,000 nukes to "destroy the US". 10,000 nukes could maybe destroy >50% of Texas industry. If those 500 are aimed at population centers, all you'll do is kill off the weaklings. The remaining Americans will then be out to eat your children. I truly hope you don't have any firearms under your control. /media/mediaFiles/sharedAlbum/vladimir-putin-laughing_zpsov82lsef_GIF-129.gif It just goes to show you how deep the anti-nuke propaganda goes. These hoopleheads have been indoctrinated from birth that a nuclear explosion is a magical death ray Well, 9/11 resulted in 3000 deaths, caused all plane travel to stop, and had a huge impact that has caused ripples in the world still occurring today. So, I'd say that losing lets say, 150,000 people per city x idk 350 nukes = 52,500,000 people potentially killed within a pretty short time. That's probably conservative considering people are much more densely packed into urban areas now than in 1940's Japan. what's the radioactive fallout like from several hundred locations around the country? Compare this to say, the traditional bombing going on in Ukraine. How many Ukrainians have been killed? How has this impacted their country thus far? I'm struggling to see how the U.S. being nuked in a full scale nuclear strike, something of a magnitude like a thousand times worse than what's happening in Ukraine, or wars in Iraq or Syria, is something perceive as, "ho hum, nukes aren't death rays, factories would keep working fine, rural folk would survive, it'll just muss our hair." That makes about as much sense as being like, "well, the bullets only struck my heart, my brain, my kidneys, and my lugs, but most of the tissue is still there, and like 95% of my physical body is still intact, look, there's just little holes on the outside, so...this is fine." Nah, it's more like, "I have a GDP of 21,000 billion dollars and 0.5% of my population wants to exterminate you. You just shot your entire load and now I have a GDP of 20,000 billion dollars and now 85% of my population wants to exterminate you." It would take a mind-boggling amount of ordinance to "destroy" the USA. The planes were grounded because of uncertainty surrounding the attack and not because of a physical reason. But you know this. Duuuuuuuuuude, come on, the Boston Marathon bombers caused a whole city to grind to a halt. https://static.infowars.com/2013/04/i/general/bead.jpg You think a massively nuked U.S. wouldn't be countless times worse? Do you think the grocery stores would stay stocked, the utilities in all those cities would stay running, clean water keeps flowing, everyone just goes to work, dons a gas mask, and works double time to make up for their dead co-worker, and their vaporized upper management? Comeeee onnnnn, you're being https://www.tau.ac.il/~tsirel/dump/Static/knowino.org/w/images/thumb/2/26/Obtuse_angle_(geometry).png/800px-Obtuse_angle_(geometry).png I know you are but what am I? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 12:11:51 PM EST
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm not acting like it's magic death. Yes, much of Hiroshima was of wood construction. But even the concrete buildings were damaged. One nuke in one city would kill a lot of people and destroy a lot of infrastructure. And over the last two years we've seen how society reacts to something they can't see that can kill them or make them sick. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Ok, and you stop acting like it's magic death. Bombs are bigger, but buildings are stronger. Most of those buildings were wooden stick structures. It's one reason that Japanese cities responded so well to firebombing attacks. Russia can throw 300kt bombs around, but to DESTROY the USA, it's going to take a shitton of them. A metric fuckload. In other words, a lot. I don't think many people appreciate how much industry this country has. I'm not acting like it's magic death. Yes, much of Hiroshima was of wood construction. But even the concrete buildings were damaged. One nuke in one city would kill a lot of people and destroy a lot of infrastructure. And over the last two years we've seen how society reacts to something they can't see that can kill them or make them sick. Russia is invisible? Astounding. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 12:20:27 PM EST
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Russia is invisible? Astounding. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 12:26:45 PM EST
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Starting to get mildly worried Putin might just get desperate enough to do something really stupid. I think most of us thought that this thing would be a shit show for Ukraine but it has turned into a shit show for Russia. Putin seems like the type that is way too arrogant to back down. He is close clearly retarded. Arrogance and stupidity don't play well.  Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted:
Starting to get mildly worried Putin might just get desperate enough to do something really stupid. I think most of us thought that this thing would be a shit show for Ukraine but it has turned into a shit show for Russia. Putin seems like the type that is way too arrogant to back down. He is close clearly retarded. Arrogance and stupidity don't play well. That ship has sailed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 12:30:11 PM EST
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No u Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: 500 nukes would be a minor hiccup. There is too much land area in the USA, the industries are too spread out, for even 10,000 nukes to "destroy the US". 10,000 nukes could maybe destroy >50% of Texas industry. If those 500 are aimed at population centers, all you'll do is kill off the weaklings. The remaining Americans will then be out to eat your children. Consult mental health authorities right away. You're in need of their services. No u  |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 12:31:55 PM EST
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You think people were hysterical about COVID? Imagine their reaction to radiation. And learn to spell ordnance correctly. Ordinance is a rule or regulation. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Russia is invisible? Astounding. You think people were hysterical about COVID? Imagine their reaction to radiation. And learn to spell ordnance correctly. Ordinance is a rule or regulation. Alright, you got me on that one. Ordnance. Personally I'd be more out for revenge than concerned about radiation.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 12:34:00 PM EST
[#45]
Quoted:
Would be really interesting to know how many of them actually still are functional. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 1:31:47 PM EST
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: https://i.imgur.com/jooZDiD.jpg Needless to say I think you’re underestimating the reality of 500 cans of sunshine. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: 500 nukes would be a minor hiccup. There is too much land area in the USA, the industries are too spread out, for even 10,000 nukes to "destroy the US". 10,000 nukes could maybe destroy >50% of Texas industry. If those 500 are aimed at population centers, all you'll do is kill off the weaklings. The remaining Americans will then be out to eat your children. https://i.imgur.com/jooZDiD.jpg Needless to say I think you’re underestimating the reality of 500 cans of sunshine. That map is fucking hilariously wrong. 500 warhead strike 100% go to nuclear weapons and NC3 targets. 1000 warheads strike 100% go to nuclear weapons and NC3 targets. You don't go city busting or you get your cities busted. You have to disarm and disable an opponents deterrent force first and THEN you hold their value targets at hazard. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 1:47:54 PM EST
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 500 nukes would be a minor hiccup. There is too much land area in the USA, the industries are too spread out, for even 10,000 nukes to "destroy the US". 10,000 nukes could maybe destroy >50% of Texas industry. If those 500 are aimed at population centers, all you'll do is kill off the weaklings. The remaining Americans will then be out to eat your children. I wouldn't target population centers to destroy a country. Destroy infrastructure though, and the population centers will destroy themselves. Just taking out the 3 largest shipping ports would knock out 45% of all shipping traffic. Another dozen nukes for the largest trucking distribution centers would cripple the trucking industry. Another 10 for the top oil/gas refineries. And you have a stranded and cold populace Not sure that you can completely destabilize the power grid with the left over 450 nukes - but you could take out large enough areas to make it truly hurt. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 1:49:18 PM EST
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That map is fucking hilariously wrong. 500 warhead strike 100% go to nuclear weapons and NC3 targets. 1000 warheads strike 100% go to nuclear weapons and NC3 targets. You don't go city busting or you get your cities busted. You have to disarm and disable an opponents deterrent force first and THEN you hold their value targets at hazard. Exactly. The only wild card is Putin thinking he can get away with something he really can't. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 1:51:26 PM EST
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That map is fucking hilariously wrong. 500 warhead strike 100% go to nuclear weapons and NC3 targets. 1000 warheads strike 100% go to nuclear weapons and NC3 targets. You don't go city busting or you get your cities busted. You have to disarm and disable an opponents deterrent force first and THEN you hold their value targets at hazard. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: 500 nukes would be a minor hiccup. There is too much land area in the USA, the industries are too spread out, for even 10,000 nukes to "destroy the US". 10,000 nukes could maybe destroy >50% of Texas industry. If those 500 are aimed at population centers, all you'll do is kill off the weaklings. The remaining Americans will then be out to eat your children. https://i.imgur.com/jooZDiD.jpg Needless to say I think you’re underestimating the reality of 500 cans of sunshine. That map is fucking hilariously wrong. 500 warhead strike 100% go to nuclear weapons and NC3 targets. 1000 warheads strike 100% go to nuclear weapons and NC3 targets. You don't go city busting or you get your cities busted. You have to disarm and disable an opponents deterrent force first and THEN you hold their value targets at hazard. Perhaps, but only if your intent is to "win" a stand-off. If your intent is solely to destroy without concern of your own outcome, things change radically! |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2022 1:56:12 PM EST
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: A pic of Hiroshima after Little Boy. Current Russian SLBM warheads are up to 10 times as powerful. Stop acting like it's a pillow fight. https://media2.s-nbcnews.com/j/newscms/2016_21/1551436/ss-160525-hiroshima-bombing-archive-09_d907b4e7e6fc0061aec814a14c1bed50.nbcnews-ux-2880-1000.jpg The phenomenon isn't linear - it is logarithmic. "10 times as powerful" = twice the damage. And modern cities are a lot harder and hardier than Japanese war-time cities. "100 times as powerful" = 1.5 megaton, which would be a very large warhead - too big to MIRV so you would only get one on a missile = four times the damage. Now when you factor in critical targets to try to blunt or slow a retaliation strike will have to be serviced by many, MANY warheads from different delivery vehicles to make sure you take them out, and the fact that hardened targets will be surface detonations - more fallout but less outright initial damage, and "500 bombs" isn't really enough to even make a first strike possible. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
