Ukraine, how does this end?

things must be heating up over there because i saw on the news today all canadian forces(army,air force and navy)where put on alert for rapid deployment depending on nato needs and for all you in the usa that say its not your problem in both world wars you where the last in it

What Boco and Dirt are both saying is America is the chump willing to open its pockets.

America would not do well going it alone against a Russia Chinese alliance.
As a member of the Nato alliance Russia and chinese alliance would lose.
The weaponry of the UK and France is some powerful.

You definitely will see chinese on your shores if you dont remain part of Nato.
US,Canada UK and others are the founding members of Nato.
You are as much a part of Nato as we are.
Nato Alliance was formed after WW2 to counter the Communist threat to Democracy.
The first cold war battle was the Berlin airlift against USSR right after the end of WW2.
Should have listened to Patton.

Just curious wildflight which side do you see India on? I tend to think of them leaning towards the USA but I very well could be wrong.

Lots of folks don’t want to accept that we are dangerously close to nuclear weapons being actually used. Most shrug it off saying Putin is just posturing,,, I legit think Putin is past piddling. The hypersonic missle used today was kind of a warning,,,

Using a nuke is a really really dumb decision now days for a multitude of reasons

You definitely will see chinese on your shores if you dont remain part of Nato.
US,Canada UK and others are the founding members of Nato.
You are as much a part of Nato as we are.
Nato Alliance was formed after WW2 to counter the Communist threat to Democracy.
The first cold war battle was the Berlin airlift against USSR right after the end of WW2.
Should have listened to Patton.

With all the natural resources and what not we have ,what would be the point in using a nuke ? Especially with the risk of mutual destruction?

China isn’t coming on our shores the same reason Japan didn’t during World War 2. They know there will be a gun behind every rock and tree.

China isn’t coming on our shores the same reason Japan didn’t during World War 2. They know there will be a gun behind every rock and tree.

ya'll need to study up on keeping safe from fallout....

With all the natural resources and what not we have ,what would be the point in using a nuke ? Especially with the risk of mutual destruction?

That and they don't have a blue water navy with anything one functional air craft and well where the heck are they actually goin to be able to drop anchor and disembark??

@Wolfdog91

You can't seriously be further off base on the subject.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/05/china/china-world-biggest-navy-intl-hnk-ml-dst/index.html

taiwan is pretty close to china....

You definitely will see chinese on your shores if you dont remain part of Nato.
US,Canada UK and others are the founding members of Nato.
You are as much a part of Nato as we are.
Nato Alliance was formed after WW2 to counter the Communist threat to Democracy.
The first cold war battle was the Berlin airlift against USSR right after the end of WW2.
Should have listened to Patton.

So few people really know about real nuclear weapons and nuclear war fighting strategies but its not surprising given what has been fed to them over many decades.

First of all, most people in the combatant nations, let alone the world, aren't going to be "vaporized" by the heat of a detonation unless there is a total city busting campaign by one or both sides. Vaporizing heat of direct weapon effects is closest to the denotation point. The blast wave has greater range and killing potential but its still limited by distance and to some aspect, the lay of the land, especially in an urban area. Will get to fallout radiation in a bit but direct weapons radiation exposure generally would occur within the high heat or high blast wave areas so most people wouldn't die from that effect but one or the others just mentioned.

News flash for the "megaton" heads, very few of those weapons are currently on anyone's missiles. A couple of reasons why, one nuclear physics don't work in an exponential way when comparing yields vs direct weapons effects area extent. A 20 megaton warhead isn't going to have a 1,000x more high heat and blast wave distance as a 20 kiloton weapon, Sorry to disappoint, it just isn't going to happen. I can't remember the exact distance increase that big megaton weapons do for direct weapons effects but its surprising not that much, maybe 3x or maybe more but no way hundreds of times greater spread. The second reason why there are few megaton weapons out there is that MIRVing changed things a lot. What's better in a war fighting operation, launching a missile with 1 meagton or larger warhead or launching a missile with 3 to 10 warheads?? I believe Minuteman III carried (ies) 3- 200 kilo range weapons, Peacekeeper 10 warheads and Trident II 10 warheads as well. Most are at max 300 kilos a piece, probably smaller.

Ok, "fallout". It is different than direct weapon effect radiation release that happens near detonation zone. Fallout are materials that has become radioactive, such as soil, concrete, whatever that has come in close contact with a detonating device, such as missile silo busters, deep command busters, etc and then comes back to the ground at a later date farther away. The "best" way to "kill" cities is with air bursts at an optimal height and as such these detonations don't cause fallout. As someone who lived with 150 U.S. missile silos 200-350 miles (more beyond that depending on the wind directions) west of me, I used to worry about the real threat of fallout a lot. But the Minuteman IIs are no more, so except for the 2-3 bases that still have Minuteman IIIs and the 1-2 bases that has Peacekeeprs, there are far fewer U.S. dug in land based missile silos that would take near ground hits to take them out. The "fallout" threat in the U.S. is much less now than what it would have been say in the 1980s through sometime in the late 1990s.

Then there is the "nuclear winter" theory and other long lasting issues that I won't address.

With all this said, would millions of people die in a massive nuclear exchange between NATO and Russia (and maybe the Chinese), yes, probably, especially if all out attacks are done mostly on metropolitan areas. That would be bad juju SO DON'T DO IT!! But the idea that most of humanity would die in a day to a year or so later is not realistic. Not even really close...

Lots of hinterland there-not much of that in the USA.Pretty small landmass in comparison.

So few people really know about real nuclear weapons and nuclear war fighting strategies but its not surprising given what has been fed to them over many decades.

I believe Minuteman III carried (ies) 3- 200 kilo range weapons, Peacekeeper 10 warheads and Trident II 10 warheads as well. Most are at max 300 kilos a piece, probably smaller.

Most of Russia's land is in Siberia, few people live there. Most of the people live west of the Ural Mountains in the European side of the country. European Russia is smaller in size than CONUS USA. CONUS USA is a little over 8 million sq. kms, European Russia is less than 4 million sq. kilometers.

I recall the Minuteman III carried three w-78 warheads. If I remember correctly, they were around 350kt. I recall a response we had to Oscar 8 silo in Montana for an A&F nogo. It was fun responding to the silo during that episode with a blizzard just as we got there. I was at KI Sawyer at the time, and they jinned up a KC135 to fly our team out there. We were a centralized support base, and Malmstrom was one of our bases.

How big is the Tsar Bomba?

You definitely will see chinese on your shores if you dont remain part of Nato.
US,Canada UK and others are the founding members of Nato.
You are as much a part of Nato as we are.
Nato Alliance was formed after WW2 to counter the Communist threat to Democracy.
The first cold war battle was the Berlin airlift against USSR right after the end of WW2.
Should have listened to Patton.

I just googled it,it was from 1960,50 MT yeild.
I was 4 YO when the russians tested it,in the arctic,lol.

How big is the Tsar Bomba?

I bet you were more scared of the nuns than the nukes.

How many would they have to send to hold a beach head on the west coast? They would have to get them across 6200 miles of Pacific without us knowing about it... Land them... Fight to gain a beach head, and then hold it long enough for reinforcements to start arriving.

Satellites using synthetic aperture radar can bounce a signal into open hangar doors and see the aircraft inside... And they can use thermal imaging to see a ship's powerplant heating up before it leaves the dock.

This isn't WW2, you can't hide significant troop movements anymore. We'll know they're getting ready to leave before their grunts have their rice stowed for the trip.

Mike

I just googled it,it was from 1960,50 MT yeild.
I was 4 YO when the russians tested it,in the arctic,lol.

Check out their armaments.
The only reason the US is always spending money on armaments is that they are continually supplying billions to the camel humpers to shoot back at you lol.
Other countries dont do that.

How many would they have to send to hold a beach head on the west coast? They would have to get them across 6200 miles of Pacific without us knowing about it... Land them... Fight to gain a beach head, and then hold it long enough for reinforcements to start arriving.

Satellites using synthetic aperture radar can bounce a signal into open hangar doors and see the aircraft inside... And they can use thermal imaging to see a ship's powerplant heating up before it leaves the dock.

This isn't WW2, you can't hide significant troop movements anymore. We'll know they're getting ready to leave before their grunts have their rice stowed for the trip.

Mike

Eve of Destruction