Why does everyone keep saying "A nuclear war is unwinnable for everyone involved"?

[Concerned American]

I think our biggest nukes have like half the yield of that monster nuke.

How many warheads are on a typical ICBM? I think they far outnumber the destructive capability of that bomb in either Russia or the US.

 

[Concerned American]

Actually, i dont think there has been a ton of progress in nuke tech for a long time, and our current nukes arent as big as the Tsar Bomb. I think our biggest nukes have like half the yield of that monster nuke.

All research has been put into delivering nukes. It started with ICBM's, then they went to nuclear subs and now they are concentrating on speed. Russia has definitely made progress there, unfortunately. Their new Sarmat missiles are crazy fast. Once upon a time we had a 4-6 hour heads up if Russia launched a nuke. I think its like 15-30 minutes now. It gives us no time to consider our response, which means our response will almost certainly be to launch everything.

Which would ensure MAD. BTW, the US hasn't been sitting on their hands during all this time either. Hypersonic technology has been around for a LONG time. The SR-71, which has been retired, is a case in point. The designer, I believe his name was Kelly, admitted in a 60 Minutes interview in the 90s that he was authorized to say that plane would go MACH2+. When questioned about how plus, his response was that at a certain point those speeds are irrelevant. If the US retired the SR-71 you can bet your bottom dollar that they have something far superior in their arsenal.

 

[Godboy]

How many warheads are on a typical ICBM? I think they far outnumber the destructive capability of that bomb in either Russia or the US.

They have multiple warheads, usually. The reason we dont make giant Tsar bombs is because they are overkill. You dont need that much yield to destroy a city, and the enormous amount of radiation left from them will travel with the winds. That radiation will blow over to us after a few days.

...and yes, a lower yield cluster nuke is superior to the Tsar bomb because, the clusters will also hit the surrounding towns of that city.

 

[Godboy]

Which would ensure MAD.

Yep, it sure would.

 

[Godboy]

Which would ensure MAD. BTW, the US hasn't been sitting on their hands during all this time either. Hypersonic technology has been around for a LONG time. The SR-71, which has been retired, is a case in point. The designer, I believe his name was Kelly, admitted in a 60 Minutes interview in the 90s that he was authorized to say that plane would go MACH2+. When questioned about how plus, his response was that at a certain point those speeds are irrelevant. If the US retired the SR-71 you can bet your bottom dollar that they have something far superior in their arsenal.

Oh, I have no doubt that our nukes are better than Russias, but it doesnt matter in the end. We currently have no way to shoot down Sarmat missiles. They are just too fast, but you can be sure that the US is working on it. Its also entirely possible that the US already has the tech to do it, but its ultra top secret. Hard to say, but the Pentagon was surprised when Russia launched the first Sarmat, so that isnt a good sign.

 

[Godboy]

Fun fact about the Tsar Bomb. The Russian scientists who were going to test it had some concerns about the amount of nuclear fuel in that monster. They thought it had the possibility of creating a chain reaction that wouldnt stop, which would destroy the entire planet. They decided to roll the dice in the end. True story.

 

[Concerned American]

We currently have no way to shoot down Sarmat missiles.

That you know of. I believe if we knew all of the capabilities that we have for defense and destruction it would turn your hair white--in my case the fourteen white hairs would fall out. LOL

 

[Godboy]

That you know of. I believe if we knew all of the capabilities that we have for defense and destruction it would turn your hair white--in my case the fourteen white hairs would fall out. LOL

Yep, that we know of. When i was in the military in 90's, the rule of thumb about military tech was, anything released to the public today, was invented 30 years ago. Those stealth fighters that they suddenly broke out for the Iraq war, were invented 30 years prior.

 

[1stNickD]

Is this some kind of a mantra based on hundreds of years of mankind's experience with nuclear war?

I mean come the fuck on now: The only time throughout history that nuclear weapons were used, was by these United States of America toward the end of WW2.

And if you remember your history correctly, we fucking won. The Japs lost, and it ended the whole fucking war right then and there. And in spite of the seared flesh and vaporized cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, look how Japan turned out to be good buddies of ours 70 years later. Amazing, ain't it?

Maybe we should just nuke the living fuck out of both Russia and China right now, and worry about the consequences later. No guts, no glory.

A nuclear war is winnable only if one side is too chickenshit to respond in kind. Russia, China and North Korea would respond in kind, The only people I am worried about now is that feckless fuck we have in the Whitehouse. And the French.

If Russia thinks the USA or UK will not respond in kind, then they may well use nukes to reclaim the old soviet boundaries. If that happens then China will know they can own all of Asia because India and Pakistan do not have enough nukes to wipe out China. If we do respond then Russia will launch against us. A few may survive, but that's not winning, that's being condemned to hell. And frankly, if the choice is no freedom or be vaporized, then vaporize me. Screw China, screw Russia and screw the socialists and communists in America. No, I'm sorry, fuck the socialists and communists in America. screw is too nice a word for them.

The only thing that makes our nukes worth the money we spend on them now, is the promise to any assholes on earth that if they launch, so do we. It's called MAD and it works. Until our feckless fool in the white house now, every other president in modern history was smart enough to explain that no option is off the table.

 

[1stNickD]

Yep, that we know of. When i was in the military in 90's, the rule of thumb about military tech was, anything released to the public today, was invented 30 years ago. Those stealth fighters that they suddenly broke out for the Iraq war, were invented 30 years prior.

And its been 30 years since they were first seen. But we don't do things like we used to, sadly I am not sure we have the engineers in place or coming out of yo our pathetic school systems to keep us on the front edge of anything anymore.

 

[skye]

Horrible as it sounds..... nuclear war is always a possibility.

And as things seem to be going now... I hope NATO will stop the bullshit.

That's all.