Russia amps up nuclear threat.

  • qooqie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    He won’t just fling nukes to Ukraine. If he’s going to do that he’s going for much more. He also doesn’t care if 95% of the world suffer from the nuclear fallout

    • TheBlue22@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      Given the effectiveness of the ruzzian orc army and preparedness of NATO to meet their threats, I wouldn’t be surprised if most, not all the silos were hit before they could even launch.

    • chronicledmonocle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      “Nuclear fallout” in modern nukes is isolated to the area they hit. As such, modern nukes aren’t going to irradiate the atmosphere that would lead to a Fallout video-game style world.

      What they will do is kill a f*** ton of people and thermally destroy a specific area REALLY hard. If you’re in the blast radius, you won’t even know it. You’ll be dead from the shockwave so fast you’ll have literally less than a second of confusion before you get turned into meat mist.

      • sugartits@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        1 month ago

        And who says Russia will use “modern” nukes?

        We’ve already seen rusty museum pieces on the front line in this conflict.

        • chronicledmonocle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          Modern nukes are also more damaging and explosive. I’d imagine if Russia wanted to go full agro, they’d use the biggest ass bomb they can muster.

          But you’re right…they might not use H bombs and opt for A bombs instead.

      • Rayquetzalcoatl@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 month ago

        Is that true? :o I thought the way nukes irradiated the atmosphere was through all the dust and shit thrown up during the explosion being blown around by wind currents? Has that changed with new nukes?

        • ours@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          I have serious doubts about how “clean” even a modern nuke is but modern weapons are supposedly more efficient and therefore cleaner than WW2 equivalents. The other factor is where the bomb is detonated.

          At ground level, it irradiates and throws up more material than if it is detonated high up in the air in an air burst configuration.

          In any case, any kind of nuke crosses a diplomatic line that would bring a world of hurt against Putin which is not worth the tactical win. His nukes are way more useful as a saber to rattle to scare off Western countries from supporting Ukraine too effectively out of fear of escalation.

          I could only see Putin use nukes in a desperate last-ditch defense against invaders at Moscow’s gates.

        • Urist@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          More worried about this triggering an ice age and subsequent global failure of what crops remain.

      • Gsus4@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        when you say modern nukes, do you mean simply H-bombs/thermonuclear/fusion bombs?