nuclear war

[Sekwo]

(19 July 2023, 16:01)Straight Shooter Wrote: What ! We need qualifications to be a part of this forum now ?

In my experience, the people who demand others have "qualifications" usually have none themselves ... they just want to cite one of a very few environmental activists who somehow managed to scrape through a science course as "the world's only expert"

[Sekwo]

(26 August 2022, 10:35)bigpaul Wrote: there is no where to hide from Nuclear weapons in the UK except maybe the Highlands of Scotland.
everywhere else is too close to a target location whether a big city or a military installation, even if there is a small pocket between targets which might be survivable it is not liveable in the long term.

Paul, first a big thanks ... you've opened my eyes to a few issues I had not considered, particularly in the post nuclear exchange phase.

before responding _I've just found this on a forum:

* From 20 July 00:00 Moscow time, all ships sailing in the waters of the Black Sea to Ukrainian ports will be considered as potential carriers of military cargoes.
* The flag countries of such ships will be considered to be involved in the Ukrainian conflict on the side of the Kiev regime.
* A number of sea areas in the north-western and south-eastern parts of the international waters of the Black Sea have been declared temporarily dangerous for navigation.

This creates another trigger point that could rapidly escalate into nuclear war.

On your comment re hiding in the Highlands of Scotland. That is one of the better places to be during a nuclear exchange, but when the food runs out, there isn't a lot of food-growing capacity, so not a great long-term solution.

On survivability, the Russians don't waste ammo bombing civilians. They would use the right size and number of nuclear weapons to neutralise our nuclear weapons and military. Which again doesn't mean killing troops, although there will be ... "collateral damage" I think is the US term for deliberate killing ... to those in the HQs.

[Sekwo]

And it's already escalating:
The German paper Bild has already said: "Nato should send warship". Russia has already said it will attack any ships that come to help Ukraine as it will treat them as combatants in the war.

[bigpaul]

I think your wrong about Russians not bombing civilians as many flattened apartment blocks testify.

[Sekwo]

(20 July 2023, 12:48)bigpaul Wrote: I think your wrong about Russians not bombing civilians as many flattened apartment blocks testify.

They bomb civilian buildings, when occupied by Zelensky's forces. But unlike the US, which uses massive bombs and numerous ones, for "shock and awe" and deliberate "collateral damage", the Russians use much smaller weapons ... which also allows them to use many more.

This is clearly their tactics with conventional weapons, because it makes good PR as it makes the US use of shock and awe terror tactics in Iraq & Serbia look quite appalling.

But, if it came to the use of nuclear weapons, I think Russia would have one goal in mind: to totally destroy the ability of the US, UK & France to retaliate. And, I don't think they will care how many civilians are killed in that process. But, the reality of being attacked with nuclear weapons might look very different from how we imagine ... or are led to believe it would happen by US media.

[bigpaul]

if Russia were to use nuclear weapons on anyone, their country would cease to exist very shortly after.
its called retaliation and like I said before, Russia is one country but NATO is many.

[Sekwo]

(20 July 2023, 13:22)bigpaul Wrote: if Russia were to use nuclear weapons on anyone, their country would cease to exist very shortly after.
its called retaliation and like I said before, Russia is one country but NATO is many.

Russia knows that, which is why there will be no warning and they will have a plan to totally destroy the western capability. It won't happen in stages. Russia will know it cannot hit all Nato's weapons, but it will attempt to destroy enough of them, to make retaliation pointless.

[Skean Dhude]

NATO may be many but most of them don't have nukes. So if Russia nukes Kiev now would the nuclear powers really decide to put themselves in the firing line and attack Russia with nukes? I'm not so sure as giving weapons and fighting a proxy war isn't the same as putting your country into a war.

[bigpaul]

Ukraine is not a member of Nato....yet, and I dont think Nato will get into a nuclear war with Russia over Ukraine.
giving Ukraine weapons is one thing but an all out nuclear war is something else.

[Pete Grey]

(19 July 2023, 16:01)Straight Shooter Wrote: What ! We need qualifications to be a part of this forum now ?

Of course not, we just need to take notice of all the long established and PROVEN facts, from seventy years and not rubbish them if we don’t agree with them.

For the record I don’t believe the UK would survive a nuclear attack, I was just repeating some FACTS as there seemed to be some misunderstanding about fallout.

Does anyone know if the government publication “the effects of nuclear weapons” still available ?.