The Myth That Nuclear Weapons Can Kill Everyone On Earth-many times over

I never argued that it wouldn't. But histrionic overstatements like "we can kill everyone on Earth ten times over" (and you know these statements have been made for decades) serve no good purpose.

 

What about the other 250 million Americans?

And are there even 100 5 megaton nuclear weapons in existence in the entire world today?

 

No. I'm wanting American policy makers and the voters they listen to, to not freak out about the possibility of nuclear weapons being used and think clearly and coherently.

 

Remember the anti-nuke/anti-war Hollywood Left movie "On the Beach" ?

>" In early 1964, in the months following World War III, the conflict has devastated the Northern Hemisphere, polluting the atmosphere with nuclear fallout, killing all life there. Air currents are slowly carrying the fallout south; the only areas still habitable are in the far reaches of the Southern Hemisphere.
From Australia, survivors detect an incomprehensible Morse code signal coming from the West Coast of the United States. The American nuclear submarine, USS Sawfish, now under Royal Australian Navy command, is ordered to sail north to the United States to attempt to make contact with the sender of the Morse signal. The submarine is commanded by Capt. Dwight Towers (Gregory Peck), who must leave his new friend, the alcoholic Moira Davidson (Ava Gardner).

The Australian government arranges for its citizens to receive suicide pills or prepared injections so they may end things quickly before there is prolonged suffering from radiation sickness. An Australian naval officer, Peter Holmes (Anthony Perkins) and his wife, Mary, who is in denial about the impending disaster, have a baby daughter. Assigned to travel with the American sub for several weeks, Peter tries to explain to Mary how to euthanize their baby and then kill herself should he not be home yet when the end comes; Mary reacts very emotionally to this prospect.

One scientist's theory is that the radiation level near the Arctic Ocean could be lower than that found at the mid-Northern Hemisphere, possibly indicating that the radiation could disperse before reaching the Southern Hemisphere. This theory is to be explored as part of the submarine's main mission. After sailing to Point Barrow, Alaska, they find that radiation levels are, in fact, intensifying.

Later, when Sawfish arrives in the San Francisco Bay area,...-> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Beach_(1959_film) "<

 

Hiroshima.

Nagasaki.

 

1 tsar bomba launched at London would create a fallout cloud that would cover the majority of western Europe and make it uninhabitable because of radiation for decades.

 

Agreed. Not to mention both the massive fallout and its long term health consequences plus the possibility of nuclear winter. Can't eat dirt, just each other.


https://www.smithsonianmag.com/scie...-warned-world-about-nuclear-winter-180967198/
In 1980, paleontologist Luis Alvarez and his physicist father Walter presented evidence that an asteroid had hit Earth at the end of the Cretaceous Period. They argued that the impact had thrown so much dust and debris into the air that Earth was blanketed in shadow for an extended period, long enough to wipe out the last of the non-bird dinosaurs. If true, this hypothesis showed a way that a catastrophe in one location could have long-term effects on the entire planet.

Sagan and his former students James Pollack and Brian Toon realized this work applied to climate change on Earth—as well as nuclear war. Along with meteorologists Tom Ackerman and Rich Turco, they used computer models and data collected by satellites and space probes to conclude that it wouldn’t take a full-scale thermonuclear war to cause Earth’s temperature to plummet. They found average global temperatures could drop between 15º and 25º Celsius, enough to plunge the planet into what they called “nuclear winter”—a deadly period of darkness, famine, toxic gases and subzero cold.

The authors acknowledged the limitations of their model, including poor predictions for short-term effects on small geographical scales and the inability to predict changes in weather as opposed to climate. Nevertheless, their conclusion was chilling. If the United States managed to disable the Soviet arsenal and launch its own preemptive nuclear strike (or vice versa), they wrote, the whole world would suffer the consequences:

When combined with the prompt destruction from nuclear blast, fires, and fallout and the later enhancement of solar ultraviolet radiation due to ozone depletion, long-term exposure to cold, dark, and radioactivity could pose a serious threat to human survivors and to other species … The possibility of the extinction of Homo sapiens cannot be excluded.​

The nuclear winter paper was accepted for publication in the journal Science, where it was destined to reach millions of scientists and influence decades of future research. Known colloquially by the acronym “TTAPS” after its authors’ last names, the academic article would be published on December 23, 1983. But in October, Sagan made the decision to announce his warning to the world using what amounted to a very unorthodox medium: the popular media.


http://www.askaprepper.com/us-nuclear-target-map/

 

I think the "myth" was that we have enough nukes to destroy Russia or China 20 times over, and they had the same for us. And that wasn't a myth.

The fact is that a nuclear war between Russia and the US would take out both countries in the initial strike and much of the rest of the world with the fallout. Not a rosy picture.

 

How many Americans do you think live outside of the top 100 cities in the US? I doubt you would have 25 million left, not considering the fallout.

 

Trumpees are now trying to downplay the dangers of nuclear war.

They are the most dangerous people in the world.

They are softening the ground to make nuclear war seem an acceptable option.

This is psychological warfare. The forces of evil that seek to unleash chaos are trying to warp your minds. Note that it comes from a "christian".

 

Fair enough.

Though I personally do not believe that a nuclear war is a winnable war...practically speaking.

 

I think the cancer rates would dramatically go up though throughout the world, might increase by several times current rates.
It could also trigger a mini-Ice Age that would last for a few decades.

 

No, it's really not. He is an old man who doesn't have a future, lecturing about the future.

He has no vested interests.

You can't put the genie back in the bottle. Once it starts, all of humanity hangs in the balance. Don't ever believe otherwise. It isn't a slippery slope. It is a nosedive to disaster.

 

What makes nuclear weapons effective is MAD - mutually assured destruction.

Their power only exists if they are never used.

 

total all out nuclear war?...no...even those who aren't killed in the war many many will die soon after... the global trade infrastructure will be destroyed, the average city has only a 1 to 2 week food supply, without the global trade in food civil collapse will follow..."Walking dead" scenario will be real, without the zombies...

 

Are you capable of understanding that there are protocols in place that result in the shut-down of nuclear reactors during an anticipated or detected nuclear attack?

Those protocols have been in place since 1980.

 

mmm protocols like at Fukushima and Chernobyl those worked out just great...

 

Reality and fact tent to disengage ideologues.

 

Conservative meme: "Nuclear war ain't that bad".

LOL!!!

 

The minute a nuclear war starts, we likely go to Martial Law permanently.

The Constitution is gone. THAT is what this is all about. Start a limited nuclear war and put an end to the Constitution.

Trump is positioning his Yes Men.

 

a "Wag the Dog" scenario!...mid terms coming up pushing for war by September to save his presidency is a very real option...

 

Don't give a blue baboons backside how many a nuke would or would not kill that is no excuse for leaving the trigger in the hands of a idiot moron

 

Then you started a thread to make a distinction without a difference

Does it matter if a nuclear war ONLY ends civilization as we know it or "we can kill everyone on Earth ten times over" ??

 

And Bolton was part of an idiotic group that convinced themselves that invading Iraq would be easy

 

anyone who seeks to minimize or disregard the magnitude of worldwide nuclear war, needs to be locked in a room