If something happens to Trump--given the times it did happen it was a republican who was behind the trigger, we can’t blame North Korea.
Pretty sure most of our nukes are in the 4-500 Kt range. Mega ton yields are for tipping silo nukes over. Russian fav.There is enough nuclear power sitting under the ocean surface off the coast of NK that if fatboy decides to lob nukes at us NK will be glass within 10 minutes. Each one of these can carry up to 8 individual MIRV's. Each warhead is 1.2mega tons. That's about 100 times more than Hiroshima, for EACH warhead, and each missile has 8. Each sub carries 26 missiles. Do the math.
You are so full of shit!
Do you mean SSM-N-2 Triton missile? They say it was cancelled in 1957 without made even a single prototype.
Trident
There will be 3rd degree burns at 70 mi only if the air is absolutely clean (it happens quite rarely), if skin is not covered with clothes, and if victim is exposed to the light and thermal emission for all time of the glow - more than ten seconds. It can't happen with more or less sane human being. If we feel hot we try to avoid it. And, what is even more important, if we hear alarm sound, we go to a shelter. And if you reacted quickly by hiding your face and hands, 3rd degree burns became only 1st degree.
Wow. Can't you read what is written on your picture? Radius of heavy blast damage is 1.03 mi, and radius of moderate blast damage is 2.17 mi. And on your map is definitely shown that most of the city is pretty intact.
It was my military speciality.Here is a nuclear war simulation detonation of 445kt warhead directly over Pyongyang.
Please quit acting like you know so much about this, because you don't.
That thing happens....
Or take a life?
Really? 5 warheads for Moscow and 3 warheads for St Petersburg isn't enough? Probably need the large yield.
Bullshit. You assholes invaded Ukraine. You targeted its civilian population areas and its infrastructure. And you expected to just roll over Ukraine in a few weeks.
Enough for what? To deter Russia (or America) in a commercial discussion about rights of property on a refinery in Eastern Syria, about a diamond mine in Central Africa or about an oil field somewhere in Venezuela's jungles? It's pretty enough. If we a talking about those things, the risk of losing billions dollars and many thousands of lives is definitely "unacceptable". But if we are talking about really important things, like, say, Ukraine for Russia, or California for America, those losses became a triffle. Russia already lost more. And, of course, even total destruction of Moscow is an acceptable price of victory. Napoleon had totally burnt Moscow down, but lost the war. And in several years Moscow was rebuilt much better than it was.
I prefer the term "turbo-realism". "Fantasy is truth, disguised as lie, and documentary is lie, disguised as truth". And, of course, Mordor in "The Rings of Power" is more realistic than Russia in CNN-verse.
Just google it. The square of Moscow is 989 square miles, of Saint-Peterburg is 556 square miles, square of Pyongyang is, as I said earlier, 320 square miles. Those are big and modern cities. Unlike, say, New York city, with mere 305 square miles of garbage and bums.
We don't bite more than we can chew. And comfortable chewing of even two-five million people region takes time.
Of course we play to win, not to lose. Of course, Ukraine "nation" (not a real nation, of course) should be defeated and eliminated (as "nation"). But if we conquer a territory with forty million of half-hostile population for just face a guerrilla war... It's not a victory.
