609
submitted 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) by gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works to c/noncredibledefense@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] chaosppe@lemmy.world 31 points 3 weeks ago

It took two nukes for Japan to wave the white flag. Do we really need 5,000+ nukes for anything? France has 290 and UK has 225. Thats enough to wipe one or multiple countries clean off of the map without any form of surrender.

[-] scoobford@lemmy.zip 5 points 3 weeks ago

Yes, antimissile systems will shoot down most of your missile volley, so you need to launch enough that they become overwhelmed and the few that make it through accomplish your goal.

We don't know exactly how much "most" is, but its enough that the powers that be consider our current level of armament to be necessary.

[-] chaosppe@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago

This is where I think there is a misunderstanding. You don't just fire only nukes at a country. You fire a multi pronged attack with regular bombardment aswell.

[-] LordCrom@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

Will the ones shit down rain down radioactive dust everywhere?

[-] Madison@feddit.org 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Yes, but to a way lesser degree.

The bombs become really nasty by creating a big chain reaction (boom) and then radiating the dust the explosion creates (aftermath) which then spreads everywhere.

Without a controlled explosion there will be significantly less radiating reactions and radioactive dust.

It's like deep inhaling the smoke of a package of burning fire starters VS throwing said burning fire starter into a warehouse full of fireworks (and for the sake of this argument you cant leave the warehouse and have no equipment whatsoever)

Both will probably fuck you up a bit if you're to close, but one is comparably insignificant.

[-] Lumisal@lemmy.world -2 points 3 weeks ago

Shooting down a nuclear icbm doesn't really help as much as you think, if it catches it.

Not to mention the atmosphere lighting up wouldn't be much better

[-] Madison420@lemmy.world 11 points 3 weeks ago

You know they don't go critical when you shoot them right?

[-] Lumisal@lemmy.world -1 points 3 weeks ago

Doesn't that depend on how they're set up? I'd imagine in the 50+ years since they've been invented they would have designed it so it could, specifically because modern anti missile defenses exist.

I mean, I know world governments can be dumb, but I would imagine they're not that dumb as to bother maintaining a key super weapon just to not upgrade it / design it so that it won't work if used.

[-] Madison420@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

Maybe but no not really the triggering process is extremely fast but kinda fragile because everything needs to be compressed just so.

They upgrade them, it's public knowledge for the budget. Usually it's faster smaller or different form factor plus renewal programs.

[-] Lumisal@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

But any knowledge on how modern triggering works on them I'd imagine would be kept a state secret wouldn't it? I don't think it's something you'd want others to know.

[-] ricdeh@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

Someone has to know because scientists and engineers are educated in universities and not in military boot camps. Universities are the origin of all scientific expertise in a nation, including the nation's military.

[-] Lumisal@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

They hid the Manhattan project really really well, if you've ever looked into the history.

this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2024
609 points (94.8% liked)

NonCredibleDefense

3543 readers
116 users here now

Rules:

  1. Posts must abide by lemmy.world terms and conditions
  2. No spam or soliciting for money.
  3. No racism or other bigotry allowed.
  4. Obviously nothing illegal.

If you see these please report them.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS