by "My bird IS the word" (mybirdistheword)
Published 03/02/2017 at 14:18
by "My bird IS the word" (mybirdistheword)
Published 03/02/2017 at 14:18
No Tags
STARS: 0
Kit cars are better in every concievable way.
I’ve been procrastinating on youtube today, and this vid was in my recommended. Most importantly this part in the video:
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
Makes me imagine WW3 as one in which global powers fire nukes not to make landfall, causing nuclear winter and essentially fucking themselves, but instead take out infastructure that is necessary for keeping this whole gig running and essentially starving everyone to death, which in any event the military will declare martial law, feed the soldiers first, and then proceed to duke it out with conventional weapons as the population (in developed countries at least) starves to death. Not the end of mankind per-se, but likely the death of everyone you know. which makes the whole thing far more likely as it is more palatable than MAD, and therefore more probable.
How am I doing so far?
"ZHP Sparky, the 5th" (e30s2k)
03/02/2017 at 14:23, STARS: 1
We’re focusing on OPPOcalyptic here, not apocalyptic! Honest mistake though!
"My bird IS the word" (mybirdistheword)
03/02/2017 at 14:24, STARS: 1
They are going to take our miatas away! damn gubment!
"crowmolly" (crowmolly)
03/02/2017 at 14:24, STARS: 1
Nukes are so 1960s.
WW3 will be fought via crippling economies and infrastructure via cyber attacks.
"My X-type is too a real Jaguar" (TomSlick)
03/02/2017 at 14:24, STARS: 1
Greetings, Professor Falken, A strange game. The only winning move is not to play. How about a nice game of chess?
"My bird IS the word" (mybirdistheword)
03/02/2017 at 14:28, STARS: 0
Except there is a winning move,since not everyone will die and the world will not be made uninhabitable, which somehow scares me worse.
"HammerheadFistpunch" (hammerheadfistpunch)
03/02/2017 at 14:28, STARS: 0
Reading too much Terrell Jermaine StarrtWWIII?
"My bird IS the word" (mybirdistheword)
03/02/2017 at 14:28, STARS: 0
concerned about historical cycles is all.
"My bird IS the word" (mybirdistheword)
03/02/2017 at 14:29, STARS: 0
but nothing cripples a country like destroying their electrical grid and wiping stored information.
"gogmorgo - rowing gears in a Grand Cherokee" (gogmorgo)
03/02/2017 at 14:41, STARS: 0
I’m Canadian. Apart from those who choose to take arms to defend the meek, myself and everyone I know will just go north and hide in the Boreal forest until it’s all over. We’ll be fine.
"Sir_Stig: and toxic masculinity ruins the party again." (sir-stig)
03/02/2017 at 15:21, STARS: 0
I like the idea of all holding parties nuking to oblivion the first two countries to launch nukes at each other.
"jariten1781" (jariten1781)
03/02/2017 at 15:23, STARS: 0
Except nuclear winter isn’t really a thing. You’re much more likely to get ‘nuclear winter’ from natural forest fires or large conventional weapon exchanges than a nuclear exchange and the magnitude is not nearly the 10s of degrees for a decade that the 1980s models predicted.
"My bird IS the word" (mybirdistheword)
03/02/2017 at 15:40, STARS: 0
Interesting, I haven’t heard that.
Still though, the radiation would pretty much kill everything, no? This way they kill the population without making the country radioactive.
"jariten1781" (jariten1781)
03/02/2017 at 16:20, STARS: 1
Yeah, the nuclear winter models were born of some terrible assumptions stacked on top of each other and were seized by anti-nuclear activists and unfortunately entered the public consciousness. They essentially assume that every nuclear detonation causes a firestorm (aka a fire so large that it created its own weather system...there have been ~2500 nuclear detonations and a total of one, very small, firestorm was created; There were much more firestorms created in the conventional bombings of Dresden, Hamburg, and Tokyo; there are also natural firestorms fairly regularly); then they assume that the firestorms expand from the blast radius (that has never occurred in any man caused firestorm and is incredibly rare in natural firestorms because the sucking effect they create tends to cool the surrounding area preventing the spread); then they assume that the entire city and its surroundings by mass are all combustible fuel (aka they assume all of the buildings in the city are solely made of untreated, highly combustible wood...which they’re not); then they assume that the firestorm consumes all of the fuel (firestorms tend to run out of sufficient oxygen prior to expending all fuel); then they assume that all of the firestorms are sufficient to eject the soot into the stratosphere (long story short, that doesn’t happen in the majority of firestorms, many natural conditions prevent it). It’s pure junk science, but even if you allow for it for the sake of argument even their models state that the cooling effect is limited to the northern hemisphere...so not humanity ending.
Radiation would reduce life span (more incidents of cancer and the like), but it wouldn’t kill everyone who entered or anything of the sort. People would still live in the areas...just with larger infant mortality and an average life expectancy of 60 instead of 80 or what have you (and that would only affect a generation or two).
But, any use of nuclear weapons ends with the leadership of the powers deceased, out of power, or impotent...which is how MAD works...Kings can no longer send the serfs to fight their battles while protected from personal consequence.
"My bird IS the word" (mybirdistheword)
03/02/2017 at 17:00, STARS: 0
I thought it had more to do with debris caused by the blast then soot, especially in the case of non-airburst bombs. Then again my knowledge of the subject is limited to what I have read, much of which is probably science mumbo-jumbo rather than the real thing.
"EngineerWithTools" (engineerwithtools)
03/02/2017 at 17:42, STARS: 1
Dangerous, long-lived radioactive fallout is mostly caused by non-airburst explosions, as large amounts of material are A) exposed to ionizing radiation and B) scattered over a large area. The fallout from airbursts is limited to the materials in the bomb itself - while they can be nasty (the uranium tampers, particularly), there is a relatively limited amount of material. However, airbursts are the best way to achieve widespread destruction, as the pressure wave effects the maximum area - so presumably most of the weapons in a nuclear exchange would be airburst.
"EngineerWithTools" (engineerwithtools)
03/02/2017 at 17:47, STARS: 0
Humanity survives - it may be a remnant for a long time, but no question it survives. But that’s neither here nor there, in my opinion, because it’s the assured destruction of governments (and the guaranteed deaths of those in power) that keeps MAD effective. We can argue about it’s craziness, but crazy or not, it’s the world we have.
"Axial" (axial)
03/03/2017 at 00:10, STARS: 0
No, that’s what will trigger WW III. When you can no longer compete by following the rules, you start breaking them.
"gmporschenut also a fan of hondas" (gmporschenut)
03/06/2017 at 23:16, STARS: 0
What is potentially terrifying is the question of what/if the repsonse would be of wiping out the satellite capability of another nation? It wouldn’t warrent nuking another counties and causing massive casualties. similar to if a rave team deflated all the air out of thier components tires. technically the car and driver aren’t damaged, but there is not way they can win/compete in a race.
I used to room with a physics major who went down this deep rabbit hole. of even worse an EMP that no human can control.