Spare_change
Gold Member
- Jun 27, 2011
- 8,690
- 1,293
- 280
A simplistic statement not borne out by facts.
Are you saying that nuclear winter would not be a fact? Are you saying that several strategic nuclear weapons wouldn't make an entire country uninhabitable?
Oh wait, I forgot you crazy self-destructive morons were living in an alternative reality...
Your statement was "There is no winning a nuclear war, dipshit. It's mutually assured destruction", and it is factually false. You have generalized nuclear weapons as all being some behemoth creating havoc over significant distances. Frankly, you have a first grader's understanding of the capabilities of our nuclear arsenal.
The reality is much different - most of our nuclear arsenal is contained in "tactical nuclear weapons" - simply, smaller nuclear weapons that would, in all likelihood, only affect the immediate battle area. We have weapons that confine the effect to an area - oh, say - the size of a tank squadron. A one kiloton nuclear bomb will have a maximum radiation range (not physical damage range --- that's limited to about 300 yards) of about 4.65 miles. A one kiloton nuclear bomb, in its most common configuration, is a missle about 30 inches in length - hardly the gut buster you seem to reference.
Now, as for the childish name calling - was that REALLY necessary? Did it make you feel more grown up, make your dick harder? Why don't you just lose the confrontational tone and discuss the issue?