User Panel
Quoted: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PcCLZwU2t34 This is a panel discussion that was aired on TV immediately following the move “The Day After.” If you have the time watch it. A full out nuclear exchange between NATO/Russia and potentially China would basically destroy the economies of all countries in the Northern Hemisphere. The Southern Hemisphere would fare better as it would mostly escape being directly targeted but there would so much radioactive dust and smoke it the air growing crops would be nearly impossible. Imagine the worst wildfire you can think of, and then imagine nearly all of the northern hemisphere burning like that. No firefighters to fight it. Cities and vegetation just burning until they burn themselves out. Hundreds of millions of people would be killed in the first day, and probably over a billion would be dead within a few weeks. View Quote No. No. And NO. Maximum total exchange around the time of The Day After: 20+ Gigatons Maximum total exchange tomorrow: <1 Gigaton probably way less |
|
We wouldn't have any of this trans shit and woke bullshit. Everyone will be too busy trying to get enough food to eat.
|
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: When one bird flies, they all fly. You're talking 14k war heads on each side between the US and Russia alone. We’re all dead. And by all, I mean the entire planet. It’s a reset alright. lol The fear of nukes ending it all is legit communist propaganda. Nuclear meltdowns are much more damaging than nuclear weapons in terms of radiation danger. If you survive the blast and stay inside for two days, you're probably fine. https://remm.hhs.gov/RemmMockup_files/dose-rate-decay.png I always read it was two weeks. That would be much much better, I'm just trying to prove a point. In 48 hours, you could be outside 5 hours to get your normal yearly "safe" amount. I personally wouldn't, but you're not going to melt either. |
|
Quoted: Is that last map a very old projection? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The fear of nukes ending it all is legit communist propaganda. Nuclear meltdowns are much more damaging than nuclear weapons in terms of radiation danger. If you survive the blast and stay inside for two days, you're probably fine. https://remm.hhs.gov/RemmMockup_files/dose-rate-decay.png But you can't trust them Ruskis not to do ... https://y.yarn.co/8cd53197-8fe8-4c33-ade1-3026f355caf3_text.gif https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ab/Fallout_map_USA_%28FEMA%29.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/68/US_nuclear_strike_map.svg/2560px-US_nuclear_strike_map.svg.png Anybody to the east (prevailing winds) of US ICBM fields (ground bursts are very 'dirty' / radioactive) might have a hot time of it in World War III https://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Fallout_Map_3-23-1963-Saturday-Evening-Post.jpg How many people here could seriously ride out "two weeks" with their family in a facility with air filtration for radiation protection? Is that last map a very old projection? There's also been shifts between Russia and China going counter value vs counter force. Nuclear game theory is a trip |
|
|
Quoted: When one bird flies, they all fly. You're talking 14k war heads on each side between the US and Russia alone. We’re all dead. And by all, I mean the entire planet. It’s a reset alright. lol View Quote I’ve been assured here by some that most of the Russian missiles are junk and wouldn’t make the trip across the ocean. “Little more than a dust up on our end.” |
|
Quoted: I’ve been assured here by some that most of the Russian missiles are junk and wouldn’t make the trip across the ocean. “Little more than a dust up on our end.” View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: When one bird flies, they all fly. You're talking 14k war heads on each side between the US and Russia alone. We’re all dead. And by all, I mean the entire planet. It’s a reset alright. lol I’ve been assured here by some that most of the Russian missiles are junk and wouldn’t make the trip across the ocean. “Little more than a dust up on our end.” Oh no step X37 what are you doing |
|
Sure, what’s our national debt translated into nuka cola caps?
|
|
China backs North Korea
North Korea threatens nuclear war. "Accidental" emergency nuke message takes place in Hawaii. No further details other than "yeah lol someone pushed wrong button lol sorrrruyyy" Kim shortly after agrees to nuclear talks with Trump. Russia begins developing asymmetric nuclear weapons like the gay torpedo and fake hypersonics. Hmmmmm, it's almost as if everyone but us knows you can't use the old style of nukes against the United States |
|
|
Quoted: Lol, like Russia has more than 3 working nukes View Quote Does it matter? Missile defense multiple kill vehicle hover test |
|
|
I think it would reset a lot of things that you take fro granted.
|
|
Fighting off surviving neighbors for your saved supplies and water.
|
|
Some of the major companies have been saving records for such an eventuality. Don't assume that a war is going to get you off the hook
|
|
Quoted: That would be much much better, I'm just trying to prove a point. In 48 hours, you could be outside 5 hours to get your normal yearly "safe" amount. I personally wouldn't, but you're not going to melt either. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: When one bird flies, they all fly. You're talking 14k war heads on each side between the US and Russia alone. We’re all dead. And by all, I mean the entire planet. It’s a reset alright. lol The fear of nukes ending it all is legit communist propaganda. Nuclear meltdowns are much more damaging than nuclear weapons in terms of radiation danger. If you survive the blast and stay inside for two days, you're probably fine. https://remm.hhs.gov/RemmMockup_files/dose-rate-decay.png I always read it was two weeks. That would be much much better, I'm just trying to prove a point. In 48 hours, you could be outside 5 hours to get your normal yearly "safe" amount. I personally wouldn't, but you're not going to melt either. Thank You, but me and mine will decline your generous offer of that free years worth of Radiation because "Bio-Robots" are for Russians! |
|
The panic alone would create more supply chain problems than Covid-19, let alone significant losses in the financial and manufacturing sector.
The Russians will absolutely target major population and manufacturing centers as best as they can, even at the expense of higher priority military targets. Being drunk on vodka helps. Congress-because Continuity Of Government planning means the worthless fucks will probably survive, unfortunately-will initiate some sort of hybrid martial law to maintain order and conscription while the military rebuilds to fight. Those that can work will in order to eat, those that cannot will probably already be dead. |
|
If you owe $400K in the old currency on a mortgage on a house that is a smoking hole and insurance won't cover acts of war, well... foreclose on it motherfucker.
If you owe $400K in the old currency on an intact house that has no power, water, gas, and is unreachable because nobody plows the snow, well then... the bank ain't gonna be getting any payments and they ain't gonna be foreclosing. Now watch the bank try to foreclose on the house in a temperate climate that has solar panels... I think that is where an intact government issues an executive order putting a moratorium on all foreclosures. Otherwise the shooting starts. |
|
I’d be ok in my newly acquired Costco and harem of soccer moms.
|
|
View Quote Do you think we ever actually funded and implemented such a thing? |
|
|
Quoted: Do you think we ever actually funded and implemented such a thing? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Do you think we ever actually funded and implemented such a thing? With certainty, yes. |
|
Quoted: Do you think we ever actually funded and implemented such a thing? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Do you think we ever actually funded and implemented such a thing? Why does 5th generation warfare exist if all our main state enemies are nuclear players? |
|
IRS would still be collecting taxes, fining, and taking people to court during and after nuclear war. There will never be a real economic reset until all unConstitutional taxes are eliminated.
|
|
Quoted: Mixed bag. In the big cities - property tax records, liens, title records at those courthouse would most likely be destroyed - as would those properties. Out away from the targets, your typical small county courthouse / tax office isn't a nuclear weapon worthy target, thus those records would most likely still exist. I doubt Chase Manhattan bank will have a mortgage loan service department still in existence (financial or physical). But local lenders / tax authority may still expect local properties to continue paying Or a "National Freeze" for some period T.B.D. most likely would be announced by a Continuity of Government agency until things either "stabilized" or fell completely apart. Bigger_Hammer View Quote If major cities are creators, good luck collecting my mortgage |
|
Quoted: Won't be worth the paper it's printed on View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: It does make me chuckle though. Really shows the federal priorities doesn't it? Won't be worth the paper it's printed on That was some beurocrats stretch goal for end of quarter |
|
Quoted: Do you think we ever actually funded and implemented such a thing? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Do you think we ever actually funded and implemented such a thing? @dbrad197 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exoatmospheric_Kill_Vehicle This is the OPEN stuff. I'm 90% confident we cannot be nuked by normal triads. |
|
Quoted: The fear of nukes ending it all is legit communist propaganda. Nuclear meltdowns are much more damaging than nuclear weapons in terms of radiation danger. If you survive the blast and stay inside for two days, you're probably fine. https://remm.hhs.gov/RemmMockup_files/dose-rate-decay.png View Quote I CANT DOOM TO THIS |
|
|
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground-Based_Interceptor#Next_generation_interceptor_
Combine this shit with stuff like CHAMP and SUTER and it's going to be really rough. The Russian missiles launching, then turning around and blowing themselves up was a newer generation of SUTER. The Federal government is really shitty, but as a country we are awesome at war. And even if you're super cynical, then just say the mega banks value our geography the most. |
|
the more 'modern' the society, the more devastated that society will be. food production falls worldwide, the ability to ship food anywhere fails. europe, north america, russia, china, southeast asia go lights out. all manufacturing fails, medical, drugs.
most of the world dies out. end of story. back to the stoneage. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: The fear of nukes ending it all is legit communist propaganda. Nuclear meltdowns are much more damaging than nuclear weapons in terms of radiation danger. If you survive the blast and stay inside for two days, you're probably fine. https://remm.hhs.gov/RemmMockup_files/dose-rate-decay.png I CANT DOOM TO THIS This is no longer a doom thread, this is now a schitzo thread |
|
Precious metals are not for the collapse they are to rebuild after the collapse, because they are universal.
A nuclear event or other large shake up, pretty much everything goes to barter. As things recover, barter becomes obsolete and metals trade again becomes valuable. Gold and silver are a LONG ass term play, not even a medium or a SHTF play. |
|
Quoted: No kidding. But its no surprise, arflandia is well known for getting educated by movies. In before @limaxray starts sharing recipies. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Fascinating how decades of anti-nuclear propaganda has distorted things No kidding. But its no surprise, arflandia is well known for getting educated by movies. In before @limaxray starts sharing recipies. Attached File |
|
Quoted: the more 'modern' the society, the more devastated that society will be. food production falls worldwide, the ability to ship food anywhere fails. europe, north america, russia, china, southeast asia go lights out. all manufacturing fails, medical, drugs. most of the world dies out. end of story. back to the stoneage. View Quote This is a good audio book on what a collapse would look like after an EMP attack. Lots of similarities in terms of mass starvation and death. One Second After by William R. Forstchen (Part 1) One Second After by William R. Forstchen (Part 2) |
|
Be it 10 months, 2 years, 5 years or even 10 years.
Someone from whatever bank that owns that debt will be along to collect it. It may be a lawyer with the force of government, or it may be the local warlord. Debt never goes away. |
|
Exercise for the student.
Starting assumptions are: - Per the Moscow Treaty of 2006 and the New START treaty of 2010, there are only 1500-2200 operationally deployed strategic nuclear weapons available to either the US or Russia. ODSNWs are defined as a weapon: - Mated to an ICBM - Mated to an SLBM - Stored in an igloo at a bomber base. This number is fairly accurate, as A) those kinds of weapons require specialized weapons systems to carry them, and B) numerous remote and on-site verification methods are in place to ensure compliance. Let's use 2200 weapons available as a starting point, the maximum allowed under those two treaties. - Assume all weapons are 1Mt in size. Sooo.....Go to this website. I prefer this site to many others (cough anything by Greenpeace cough cough), because this guy actually based his calculator off the works of Glasstone, the premiere nuclear effects scientist of any age, instead of "OMG THE BLAST RADIUS IS LIKE THE .45 ACP OF NUKES AND WILL DESTROY NIGERIA IF SET OFF IN HAWAII!!!" Calculate the effects radii for a 1Mt weapon. Using the thermal radiation radius (farthest-reaching effect), calculate the square mileage (multiply the km2 by .62 to get mi2) affected by said 1Mt weapon (don't forget, pi are squared ("No they're not, they're round!")). Multiply by 2200 (# of weapons available). You now have the total square mileage affected by the farthest-reaching effect of a 1Mt weapon. Question #1: compare total square mileage affected by the farthest-reaching effect of a 1Mt weapon to the total square mileage of the United States. (Wikipedia says that # is 3,796,742 square miles). Inaccuracies: - We don't use very many 1Mt weapons any more. Improvements in accuracy means they are significantly smaller than that. So the actual are affected is reduced by a significant percentage. - Remember, this is the UPPER limit of available weapons. - This assumes all yeilds are evenly spread across the country. However, the probability of kill (the chances the weapon will actually destroy the target) is never 1.0, so for targets that absolutely, positively need to die, you may decide to go 2:1 or even 3:1. So, more math. Assume the following priority targets: - 450 MMIII launch facilities - 45 MMIII launch control centers - 3 Minuteman support bases - 2 B52 bases - 1 B2 base - 2 sub bases - Let's say 20 nuclear command and control facilities of various flavors. (For the moment we'll ignore other priority military targets like the Pentagon, etc.) Calculate the number of weapons used for 3:1 targeting on the Minuteman sites + 2:1 targeting on the soft targets and 3:1 on the C2 facilities. That's the ACTUAL number of designated ground zeros, so multiply your square miles affected from one weapon by this number to get the actual square mileage affected. Question #2: compare square mileage affected by actual # of DGZs as a percentage to the total square mileage of the United States. NOTE: Most of these impacts will be in the three missile fields in the Midwest/West, and several targets on both coasts, with a few odds and ends sprinkled here and there (Omaha, Cheyenne Mountain, etc.) Question #3: Given the locations of most of those DGZs, and their LACK of proximity to most of the major economic, manufacturing, and transportation hubs of the US, (or, for that matter, most of the houses of the doomers in this thread) describe the effects that taking out these targets will have on: A) the overall economic system of the United States B) The ability to conduct an economic transaction in, say, Ohio (or Arizona, or Florida, or Topeka) C) The ability to provide water, power, sewer, and trash service in any of the places listed in B) above. I'll wait. ETA: Want to know the really sad part? This comes up often enough that I just cut and paste this into the thread. |
|
May a bomb land on my head, I don't want to live through something like that.
|
|
View Quote Well, its dinner time on Easter Sunday. And I'm sitting here thinking to myself, "you know who would probably like to argue with strangers on the internet? Limaxray." OK kids, behave yourselves, Dad's here. |
|
Quoted: Exercise for the student. Starting assumptions are: - Per the Moscow Treaty of 2006 and the New START treaty of 2010, there are only 1500-2200 operationally deployed strategic nuclear weapons available to either the US or Russia. ODSNWs are defined as a weapon: - Mated to an ICBM - Mated to an SLBM - Stored in an igloo at a bomber base. This number is fairly accurate, as A) those kinds of weapons require specialized weapons systems to carry them, and B) numerous remote and on-site verification methods are in place to ensure compliance. Let's use 2200 weapons available as a starting point, the maximum allowed under those two treaties. - Assume all weapons are 1Mt in size. Sooo.....Go to this website. I prefer this site to many others (cough anything by Greenpeace cough cough), because this guy actually based his calculator off the works of Glasstone, the premiere nuclear effects scientist of any age, instead of "OMG THE BLAST RADIUS IS LIKE THE .45 ACP OF NUKES AND WILL DESTROY NIGERIA IF SET OFF IN HAWAII!!!" Calculate the effects radii for a 1Mt weapon. Using the thermal radiation radius (farthest-reaching effect), calculate the square mileage (multiply the km2 by .62 to get mi2) affected by said 1Mt weapon (don't forget, pi are squared ("No they're not, they're round!")). Multiply by 2200 (# of weapons available). You now have the total square mileage affected by the farthest-reaching effect of a 1Mt weapon. Question #1: compare total square mileage affected by the farthest-reaching effect of a 1Mt weapon to the total square mileage of the United States. (Wikipedia says that # is 3,796,742 square miles). Inaccuracies: - We don't use very many 1Mt weapons any more. Improvements in accuracy means they are significantly smaller than that. So the actual are affected is reduced by a significant percentage. - Remember, this is the UPPER limit of available weapons. - This assumes all yeilds are evenly spread across the country. However, the probability of kill (the chances the weapon will actually destroy the target) is never 1.0, so for targets that absolutely, positively need to die, you may decide to go 2:1 or even 3:1. So, more math. Assume the following priority targets: - 450 MMIII launch facilities - 45 MMIII launch control centers - 3 Minuteman support bases - 2 B52 bases - 1 B2 base - 2 sub bases - Let's say 20 nuclear command and control facilities of various flavors. (For the moment we'll ignore other priority military targets like the Pentagon, etc.) Calculate the number of weapons used for 3:1 targeting on the Minuteman sites + 2:1 targeting on the soft targets and 3:1 on the C2 facilities. That's the ACTUAL number of designated ground zeros, so multiply your square miles affected from one weapon by this number to get the actual square mileage affected. Question #2: compare square mileage affected by actual # of DGZs as a percentage to the total square mileage of the United States. NOTE: Most of these impacts will be in the three missile fields in the Midwest/West, and several targets on both coasts, with a few odds and ends sprinkled here and there (Omaha, Cheyenne Mountain, etc.) Question #3: Given the locations of most of those DGZs, and their LACK of proximity to most of the major economic, manufacturing, and transportation hubs of the US, (or, for that matter, most of the houses of the doomers in this thread) describe the effects that taking out these targets will have on: A) the overall economic system of the United States B) The ability to conduct an economic transaction in, say, Ohio (or Arizona, or Florida, or Topeka) C) The ability to provide water, power, sewer, and trash service in any of the places listed in B) above. I'll wait. ETA: Want to know the really sad part? This comes up often enough that I just cut and paste this into the thread. View Quote Ty for truth bomb |
|
Quoted: Exercise for the student. Starting assumptions are: - Per the Moscow Treaty of 2006 and the New START treaty of 2010, there are only 1500-2200 operationally deployed strategic nuclear weapons available to either the US or Russia. ODSNWs are defined as a weapon: - Mated to an ICBM - Mated to an SLBM - Stored in an igloo at a bomber base. This number is fairly accurate, as A) those kinds of weapons require specialized weapons systems to carry them, and B) numerous remote and on-site verification methods are in place to ensure compliance. Let's use 2200 weapons available as a starting point, the maximum allowed under those two treaties. - Assume all weapons are 1Mt in size. Sooo.....Go to this website. I prefer this site to many others (cough anything by Greenpeace cough cough), because this guy actually based his calculator off the works of Glasstone, the premiere nuclear effects scientist of any age, instead of "OMG THE BLAST RADIUS IS LIKE THE .45 ACP OF NUKES AND WILL DESTROY NIGERIA IF SET OFF IN HAWAII!!!" Calculate the effects radii for a 1Mt weapon. Using the thermal radiation radius (farthest-reaching effect), calculate the square mileage (multiply the km2 by .62 to get mi2) affected by said 1Mt weapon (don't forget, pi are squared ("No they're not, they're round!")). Multiply by 2200 (# of weapons available). You now have the total square mileage affected by the farthest-reaching effect of a 1Mt weapon. Question #1: compare total square mileage affected by the farthest-reaching effect of a 1Mt weapon to the total square mileage of the United States. (Wikipedia says that # is 3,796,742 square miles). Inaccuracies: - We don't use very many 1Mt weapons any more. Improvements in accuracy means they are significantly smaller than that. So the actual are affected is reduced by a significant percentage. - Remember, this is the UPPER limit of available weapons. - This assumes all yeilds are evenly spread across the country. However, the probability of kill (the chances the weapon will actually destroy the target) is never 1.0, so for targets that absolutely, positively need to die, you may decide to go 2:1 or even 3:1. So, more math. Assume the following priority targets: - 450 MMIII launch facilities - 45 MMIII launch control centers - 3 Minuteman support bases - 2 B52 bases - 1 B2 base - 2 sub bases - Let's say 20 nuclear command and control facilities of various flavors. (For the moment we'll ignore other priority military targets like the Pentagon, etc.) Calculate the number of weapons used for 3:1 targeting on the Minuteman sites + 2:1 targeting on the soft targets and 3:1 on the C2 facilities. That's the ACTUAL number of designated ground zeros, so multiply your square miles affected from one weapon by this number to get the actual square mileage affected. Question #2: compare square mileage affected by actual # of DGZs as a percentage to the total square mileage of the United States. NOTE: Most of these impacts will be in the three missile fields in the Midwest/West, and several targets on both coasts, with a few odds and ends sprinkled here and there (Omaha, Cheyenne Mountain, etc.) Question #3: Given the locations of most of those DGZs, and their LACK of proximity to most of the major economic, manufacturing, and transportation hubs of the US, (or, for that matter, most of the houses of the doomers in this thread) describe the effects that taking out these targets will have on: A) the overall economic system of the United States B) The ability to conduct an economic transaction in, say, Ohio (or Arizona, or Florida, or Topeka) C) The ability to provide water, power, sewer, and trash service in any of the places listed in B) above. I'll wait. ETA: Want to know the really sad part? This comes up often enough that I just cut and paste this into the thread. View Quote So, your whole assumption is that the major population centers will not be targeted. 2,200 devices but there won’t be any left for, say, the 50 largest urban areas in the United States. Yeah, I wouldn’t count on that. |
|
Quoted: Exercise for the student. (Honking big snip) ETA: Want to know the really sad part? This comes up often enough that I just cut and paste this into the thread. View Quote And just like that, all of my preps have been rendered useless... Attached File |
|
Quoted: The panic alone would create more supply chain problems than Covid-19, let alone significant losses in the financial and manufacturing sector. The Russians will absolutely target major population and manufacturing centers as best as they can, even at the expense of higher priority military targets. Being drunk on vodka helps. Congress-because Continuity Of Government planning means the worthless fucks will probably survive, unfortunately-will initiate some sort of hybrid martial law to maintain order and conscription while the military rebuilds to fight. Those that can work will in order to eat, those that cannot will probably already be dead. View Quote They can continuity of government all day long but a lot of the people around here are armed to the teeth. Ain't go outsiders coming in here trying to force people to fight or work for the state without getting a face full of metal. |
|
Quoted: Exercise for the student. Starting assumptions are: - Per the Moscow Treaty of 2006 and the New START treaty of 2010, there are only 1500-2200 operationally deployed strategic nuclear weapons available to either the US or Russia. ODSNWs are defined as a weapon: - Mated to an ICBM - Mated to an SLBM - Stored in an igloo at a bomber base. This number is fairly accurate, as A) those kinds of weapons require specialized weapons systems to carry them, and B) numerous remote and on-site verification methods are in place to ensure compliance. Let's use 2200 weapons available as a starting point, the maximum allowed under those two treaties. - Assume all weapons are 1Mt in size. Sooo.....Go to this website. I prefer this site to many others (cough anything by Greenpeace cough cough), because this guy actually based his calculator off the works of Glasstone, the premiere nuclear effects scientist of any age, instead of "OMG THE BLAST RADIUS IS LIKE THE .45 ACP OF NUKES AND WILL DESTROY NIGERIA IF SET OFF IN HAWAII!!!" Calculate the effects radii for a 1Mt weapon. Using the thermal radiation radius (farthest-reaching effect), calculate the square mileage (multiply the km2 by .62 to get mi2) affected by said 1Mt weapon (don't forget, pi are squared ("No they're not, they're round!")). Multiply by 2200 (# of weapons available). You now have the total square mileage affected by the farthest-reaching effect of a 1Mt weapon. Question #1: compare total square mileage affected by the farthest-reaching effect of a 1Mt weapon to the total square mileage of the United States. (Wikipedia says that # is 3,796,742 square miles). Inaccuracies: - We don't use very many 1Mt weapons any more. Improvements in accuracy means they are significantly smaller than that. So the actual are affected is reduced by a significant percentage. - Remember, this is the UPPER limit of available weapons. - This assumes all yeilds are evenly spread across the country. However, the probability of kill (the chances the weapon will actually destroy the target) is never 1.0, so for targets that absolutely, positively need to die, you may decide to go 2:1 or even 3:1. So, more math. Assume the following priority targets: - 450 MMIII launch facilities - 45 MMIII launch control centers - 3 Minuteman support bases - 2 B52 bases - 1 B2 base - 2 sub bases - Let's say 20 nuclear command and control facilities of various flavors. (For the moment we'll ignore other priority military targets like the Pentagon, etc.) Calculate the number of weapons used for 3:1 targeting on the Minuteman sites + 2:1 targeting on the soft targets and 3:1 on the C2 facilities. That's the ACTUAL number of designated ground zeros, so multiply your square miles affected from one weapon by this number to get the actual square mileage affected. Question #2: compare square mileage affected by actual # of DGZs as a percentage to the total square mileage of the United States. NOTE: Most of these impacts will be in the three missile fields in the Midwest/West, and several targets on both coasts, with a few odds and ends sprinkled here and there (Omaha, Cheyenne Mountain, etc.) Question #3: Given the locations of most of those DGZs, and their LACK of proximity to most of the major economic, manufacturing, and transportation hubs of the US, (or, for that matter, most of the houses of the doomers in this thread) describe the effects that taking out these targets will have on: A) the overall economic system of the United States B) The ability to conduct an economic transaction in, say, Ohio (or Arizona, or Florida, or Topeka) C) The ability to provide water, power, sewer, and trash service in any of the places listed in B) above. I'll wait. ETA: Want to know the really sad part? This comes up often enough that I just cut and paste this into the thread. View Quote Here’s a fun simulation. Which Cities Would the US Target in a Nuclear War? |
|
Quoted: But you can't trust them Ruskis not to do ... https://y.yarn.co/8cd53197-8fe8-4c33-ade1-3026f355caf3_text.gif https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ab/Fallout_map_USA_%28FEMA%29.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/68/US_nuclear_strike_map.svg/2560px-US_nuclear_strike_map.svg.png Anybody to the east (prevailing winds) of US ICBM fields (ground bursts are very 'dirty' / radioactive) might have a hot time of it in World War III https://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Fallout_Map_3-23-1963-Saturday-Evening-Post.jpg How many people here could seriously ride out "two weeks" with their family in a facility with air filtration for radiation protection? View Quote What stops someone from just staying in the core center of their house with the doors and windows closed in one of the areas that’s hot. Assuming the house isn’t destroyed or the windows all blown out. If you’re home and can buckle down you’ll have some free time. Tape off any concerning gaps around doors quickly. Turn off the water lines after sealing the drains and filling the tub as much as you can before water pressure is gone. Hold out for a couple weeks will be hard but doable as long as you have water and food. Assuming you’re the typical arfcommer that’s 6’3" 9" and making half mill a year you should have the food and water preps covered. After the two weeks are up. The mob of radiated and poisoned zombies might be hard to quell… at first. Wait. Did I just type out the Arfcom fantasy ? |
|
Quoted: So, your whole assumption is that the major population centers will not be targeted. 2,200 devices but there won’t be any left for, say, the 50 largest urban areas in the United States. Yeah, I wouldn’t count on that. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Exercise for the student. Starting assumptions are: - Per the Moscow Treaty of 2006 and the New START treaty of 2010, there are only 1500-2200 operationally deployed strategic nuclear weapons available to either the US or Russia. ODSNWs are defined as a weapon: - Mated to an ICBM - Mated to an SLBM - Stored in an igloo at a bomber base. This number is fairly accurate, as A) those kinds of weapons require specialized weapons systems to carry them, and B) numerous remote and on-site verification methods are in place to ensure compliance. Let's use 2200 weapons available as a starting point, the maximum allowed under those two treaties. - Assume all weapons are 1Mt in size. Sooo.....Go to this website. I prefer this site to many others (cough anything by Greenpeace cough cough), because this guy actually based his calculator off the works of Glasstone, the premiere nuclear effects scientist of any age, instead of "OMG THE BLAST RADIUS IS LIKE THE .45 ACP OF NUKES AND WILL DESTROY NIGERIA IF SET OFF IN HAWAII!!!" Calculate the effects radii for a 1Mt weapon. Using the thermal radiation radius (farthest-reaching effect), calculate the square mileage (multiply the km2 by .62 to get mi2) affected by said 1Mt weapon (don't forget, pi are squared ("No they're not, they're round!")). Multiply by 2200 (# of weapons available). You now have the total square mileage affected by the farthest-reaching effect of a 1Mt weapon. Question #1: compare total square mileage affected by the farthest-reaching effect of a 1Mt weapon to the total square mileage of the United States. (Wikipedia says that # is 3,796,742 square miles). Inaccuracies: - We don't use very many 1Mt weapons any more. Improvements in accuracy means they are significantly smaller than that. So the actual are affected is reduced by a significant percentage. - Remember, this is the UPPER limit of available weapons. - This assumes all yeilds are evenly spread across the country. However, the probability of kill (the chances the weapon will actually destroy the target) is never 1.0, so for targets that absolutely, positively need to die, you may decide to go 2:1 or even 3:1. So, more math. Assume the following priority targets: - 450 MMIII launch facilities - 45 MMIII launch control centers - 3 Minuteman support bases - 2 B52 bases - 1 B2 base - 2 sub bases - Let's say 20 nuclear command and control facilities of various flavors. (For the moment we'll ignore other priority military targets like the Pentagon, etc.) Calculate the number of weapons used for 3:1 targeting on the Minuteman sites + 2:1 targeting on the soft targets and 3:1 on the C2 facilities. That's the ACTUAL number of designated ground zeros, so multiply your square miles affected from one weapon by this number to get the actual square mileage affected. Question #2: compare square mileage affected by actual # of DGZs as a percentage to the total square mileage of the United States. NOTE: Most of these impacts will be in the three missile fields in the Midwest/West, and several targets on both coasts, with a few odds and ends sprinkled here and there (Omaha, Cheyenne Mountain, etc.) Question #3: Given the locations of most of those DGZs, and their LACK of proximity to most of the major economic, manufacturing, and transportation hubs of the US, (or, for that matter, most of the houses of the doomers in this thread) describe the effects that taking out these targets will have on: A) the overall economic system of the United States B) The ability to conduct an economic transaction in, say, Ohio (or Arizona, or Florida, or Topeka) C) The ability to provide water, power, sewer, and trash service in any of the places listed in B) above. I'll wait. ETA: Want to know the really sad part? This comes up often enough that I just cut and paste this into the thread. So, your whole assumption is that the major population centers will not be targeted. 2,200 devices but there won’t be any left for, say, the 50 largest urban areas in the United States. Yeah, I wouldn’t count on that. Put simply, the entire exercise is a guess. Every country has their own nuclear game theory. Within each country's theory, there's no free lunch. If you target population centers, you don't get guaranteed kills on other nukes. If you target nukes, you don't take out the economy that can produce the nukes. If you try to get both you use all your nukes, and then you can get nuked. Simply put |
|
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.