Ukraine

[thplinth]

Surviving?

I saw some clip a few months ago now of a Russian politics tv show with different guests debating, where one of the people on it (and he was a bit of a cunt this dude) remarked that it would only take 'one sarmat to destroy the UK only one...'

That is the capability of these weapons nowadays. If just one of those things got through... the UK as you know it would be gone forever.

Amusingly I've thought about this quite a bit given recent events and my best hope should it kick off with the nukes is for an instant death. I hope one goes off outside my house. Not a word of a lie. 😀

IMHO this makes the cuban missile crisis look like almost nothing in comparison as the people running Biden are absolute psychotic mentalists it seems. And Russia is definitely not backing down, that I am pretty sure of. So yeah...

[Orraloon]

11 hours ago, mccaughey85 said:

I know your ripping the piss but its seriously something most of us should consider as we could be looking at nuclear winter for those of us lucky enough to be out of harms way.

Stockpiling food is probably a smart thing to do right now.

I haven't worked my way through my Brexit stockpile yet. Haven't even started on my Covid stockpile. My garage is still half full of toilet roll. I think I will make a nuclear shelter out of my spare toilet rolls. Might help cushion the blow. 

[aaid]

19 minutes ago, Orraloon said:

I haven't worked my way through my Brexit stockpile yet. Haven't even started on my Covid stockpile. My garage is still half full of toilet roll. I think I will make a nuclear shelter out of my spare toilet rolls. Might help cushion the blow. 

I think there’s still people on the last dregs of their 2008 financial crash stockpile.

 

[mccaughey85]

1 hour ago, thplinth said:

Surviving?

I saw some clip a few months ago now of a Russian politics tv show with different guests debating, where one of the people on it (and he was a bit of a cunt this dude) remarked that it would only take 'one sarmat to destroy the UK only one...'

That is the capability of these weapons nowadays. If just one of those things got through... the UK as you know it would be gone forever.

Amusingly I've thought about this quite a bit given recent events and my best hope should it kick off with the nukes is for an instant death. I hope one goes off outside my house. Not a word of a lie. 😀

IMHO this makes the cuban missile crisis look like almost nothing in comparison as the people running Biden are absolute psychotic mentalists it seems. And Russia is definitely not backing down, that I am pretty sure of. So yeah...

Depends if he decides to strike the uk. Good chance he will but maybe he would leave scotland alone. Russians have always liked us imo.

Perhaps he might just target the south of england and leave us to try and survive an apocalypse.

 

 

 

[mccaughey85]

1 hour ago, Orraloon said:

I haven't worked my way through my Brexit stockpile yet. Haven't even started on my Covid stockpile. My garage is still half full of toilet roll. I think I will make a nuclear shelter out of my spare toilet rolls. Might help cushion the blow. 

 

1 hour ago, aaid said:

I think there’s still people on the last dregs of their 2008 financial crash stockpile.

 

Its nice you guys are cracking jokes.

I am guessing you think its not going to happen and hes just making empty threats?

[phart]

As an aside over 2000 nuclear warheads have been detonated in human history.

[Malcolm]

If there is an all out nuclear war, no point in stockpiling anything.  The best you can hope for is instant vaporisation.

we are in dangerous times.  If Russia are in danger of losing the war, the use of tactical nukes against Ukraine becomes a possibility.  I doubt they will launch an all out attack on the west.  More likely small bombs on the Ukraine border.

then it will be up to the west if it escalates from there.  We could of course supply small nuclear weapons to Ukraine and then argue that it’s not us firing them, but not sure that will cut much ice.

 

[phart]

I also think tactical nuke is a misnomer. Like enhanced interrogation.

[Malcolm]

Just now, phart said:

I also think tactical nuke is a misnomer. Like enhanced interrogation.

Well….  They range don’t they from annihilation of small areas to a sarmat, that as thplinth says would wipe out the entire country… just one.

looks like nato have said they will respond with conventional force if nukes are used.  Hard to see how things can be brought back down from there.

[phart]

1 minute ago, Malcolm said:

Well….  They range don’t they from annihilation of small areas to a sarmat, that as thplinth says would wipe out the entire country… just one.

looks like nato have said they will respond with conventional force if nukes are used.  Hard to see how things can be brought back down from there.

sarmat is a delivery system, an ICBM not a nuclear warhead.

[Malcolm]

2 minutes ago, phart said:

sarmat is a delivery system, an ICBM not a nuclear warhead.

I appreciate that, but it can carry multiple nuclear warheads that would destroy Britain in one go.

[aaid]

48 minutes ago, mccaughey85 said:

 

Its nice you guys are cracking jokes.

I am guessing you think its not going to happen and hes just making empty threats?

I lived through the 1980s when the government had adverts on TV all the time about what to do in a nuclear attack so I’m pretty sanguine about the whole thing. 

[phart]

4 minutes ago, Malcolm said:

I appreciate that, but it can carry multiple nuclear warheads that would destroy Britain in one go.

The largest ever nuclear weapon tested was 50 mega tons. If it blew up above Glasgow at optimal height, Windows in Edinburgh wouldn't be smashed.

Now you have a 60km thermal radiation radius off one bomb which is incredibly destructive and Glasgow would be fucked, however, we're an order of magnitude at least over-stating the destructive power.

Edited October 6, 2022 by phart

[phart]

Looked it up it's reported that

The “Sarmat” is a heavy intercontinental ballistic missile with multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles (MIRV). This means that inside one giant missile there is a group of nuclear warheads (up to 15), each with a capacity of 350 kilotons.

So the yield is 140 times lower. Not to down-play how destructive they are, it would be apocalyptic for wherever they landed.

Edited October 6, 2022 by phart

[mccaughey85]

11 minutes ago, phart said:

Looked it up it's reported that

The “Sarmat” is a heavy intercontinental ballistic missile with multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles (MIRV). This means that inside one giant missile there is a group of nuclear warheads (up to 15), each with a capacity of 350 kilotons.

So the yield is 140 times lower. Not to down-play how destructive they are, it would be apocalyptic for wherever they landed.

I am guessing it would decimate all the uks major cities and any strategic targets that russia wanted to take out.

The rest of the uks population would be left trying to survive on an island that has heavily radiated areas. Also a nuclear winter would cause food supplies to be gone and our local farming would be fucked by so much radiation. 

Sounds like fun. Hopefully i get a direct hit. Vaporized instantly.

[Ally Bongo]

1 hour ago, mccaughey85 said:

 

Its nice you guys are cracking jokes.

I am guessing you think its not going to happen and hes just making empty threats?

His threats so far amount to tactical battlefield Nuclear weapons in Ukraine if Russian territory is attacked

An attack on anywhere else is a strategic nuclear attack and the end of the world as we know it

[mccaughey85]

7 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said:

His threats so far amount to tactical battlefield Nuclear weapons in Ukraine if Russian territory is attacked

An attack on anywhere else is a strategic nuclear attack and the end of the world as we know it

I am still surprised its not headline news and that was my original point.

These tactical nukes are a major escalation in terms of all out nuclear war. If ukraine gets hit with one then the west will be under huge pressure to respond to it.

Downplaying the situation is only burying your head in the sand.

 

[mccaughey85]

5 hours ago, thplinth said:

Notice how the biggest prowar neocon zealots on here are also the exact same Sturgeon / Clinton zealots. Not a coincidence.

Who on here is a prowar neocon zealot?

 

[Dave78]

If Putin ordered even a tactical nuclear attack, i'd be willing to bet that there would be many Stanislav Petrovs who would refuse the order.

Remember, the 'red button' is a myth. It's a figure of speech.

[mccaughey85]

3 minutes ago, Dave78 said:

If Putin ordered even a tactical nuclear attack, i'd be willing to bet that there would be many Stanislav Petrovs who would refuse the order.

Remember, the 'red button' is a myth. It's a figure of speech.

Thats optimistic thinking. Anybody who disobeys him will get a bullet or their family gets the bullet.

I dont think putin is fucking around here.

[Malcolm]

16 minutes ago, phart said:

Looked it up it's reported that

The “Sarmat” is a heavy intercontinental ballistic missile with multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles (MIRV). This means that inside one giant missile there is a group of nuclear warheads (up to 15), each with a capacity of 350 kilotons.

So the yield is 140 times lower. Not to down-play how destructive they are, it would be apocalyptic for wherever they landed.

yeah, might need a few to wipe out the Uk

[aaid]

10 minutes ago, Dave78 said:

If Putin ordered even a tactical nuclear attack, i'd be willing to bet that there would be many Stanislav Petrovs who would refuse the order.

 

Stan Petrov, the ex-Celtic player?

[Dave78]

3 minutes ago, mccaughey85 said:

Thats optimistic thinking. Anybody who disobeys him will get a bullet or their family gets the bullet.

I dont think putin is fucking around here.

We've come close to a nuclear exchange many times, and yet it hasn't happened because people refuse to carry out the order.

It's not unreasonable to think the same pattern would occur in the future.

As for getting a bullet from their superiors, why didn't that happen in the past?

[Malcolm]

31 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said:

His threats so far amount to tactical battlefield Nuclear weapons in Ukraine if Russian territory is attacked

An attack on anywhere else is a strategic nuclear attack and the end of the world as we know it

 

the problem here is that he thinks that the newly annexed parts of Ukraine are now russia, so theoretically if Ukraine starts to take them back he may use tactical nukes.  
 

What would be interesting is if Ukraine having taken back the occupied regions push in to actual Russia.

[Dave78]

8 minutes ago, Malcolm said:

 

the problem here is that he thinks that the newly annexed parts of Ukraine are now russia, so theoretically if Ukraine starts to take them back he may use tactical nukes. 

What would be interesting is if Ukraine having taken back the occupied regions push in to actual Russia.

Starts to take them back? They already are/have. Russia has 'annexed' territory it doesn't control.

As for invading Russia, Ukraine doesn't have to wait until they take back the occupied regions. They could do this tomorrow if they wanted, but won't as Western support would immediately stop.

Edited October 6, 2022 by Dave78
...