Nuclear War

[adam2]

I agree, a nuclear attack on the UK could kill the majority of the population, or put another way, a significant minority would survive.
The survivors would be a mixture of the well prepared in deep and well stocked shelters, those in areas remote from the blasts, and the simply lucky.

Those lost would include not only the initial victims of the explosions and radiation, but also those who perished afterwards from cold, heat, hunger, dehydration, violence, illness or despair.

The survivors could well be reduced to a medieval existence as portrayed in the TV series "threads"

I think that I would prefer a medieval existence to no longer existing.

[Catweazle]

I think too often, nuclear war is seen as some end point, total destruction etc. If this were true in the 1980s, I don't think this is true any more.

So Mutual Assured Destruction, the concept that we credit with keeping us safe for years, no longer exists ?

That's comforting.

[clv101]

Absolutely. It's why the risk of nuclear war is about as high now as it has ever been, possibly even higher as the very low 'dial a yield' bombs lower the threshold for use and the relationship between the Whitehouse and the Kremlin is in a terrible state. There is less mutual respect between the two nuclear superpowers now than at any point during the cold war.

[adam2]

IMHO, Mutually Assured Destruction should be taken as meaning the mutual destruction of modern technological urban societies, and not as meaning the destruction of every inhabitant.

[clv101]

The 3,000 MT, serious nuclear winter, radiation and the survivors being taken back to a medieval existence is MAD. But today's nuclear war could conceivably be just 1% the intensity, just 30 MT in total - still several hundred detonations, but a long way short of the kind of scenarios being considered 40 years ago.

There'll be areas of complete destruction of course, many cities destroyed - but most places and most of the global population won't be *directly* impacted.

[Stumuz2]

Because WMD'S exist the risk of them being used can't be zero. But, i should think it's very unlikely.

The biggest worry seems to be that Putin might feel 'backed into a corner' and loose of a nuke for shock and awe effect.

Most journalists almost wet themselves when Putin, on the eve of invasion, threatened the West with “consequences greater than any you have faced in history.”

Since then, almost everything has gone wrong. The budget he had set aside from 2014 to grease the palms of key Ukrainian officials – mayors, governors, generals, police chiefs – so that they would swap sides when the moment came, was nicked and sent to Cyprus by his spy chiefs, arse kissers, and middle men.

To add insult to injury, the entire leadership of the FSB’s Fifth Service was arrested last month.
The money that was meant to have gone on modernising Russia’s army has disappeared into Cyprus bank accounts or beach side property developments, leaving tanks stranded for want of spare parts.

Add in the sinking of the pride of Russian Black Sea Fleet, the Moskva, and things look bleak for Putin. An autocrat can survive many things, but cannot survive military disaster.

So will he loose one off? I doubt it.

Can he be sure they would work? Would one detonate on firing? Some of these are very old weapons, would there be a failure of command orders to further prepare the systems? What would be NATO'S reprisal?

In all the scenarios Russia has nothing to gain, but lots to lose.

It was a bit of oblique good news when Putin went on TV last night to say his actions are causing great pain to the west. Uncontrollable inflation, Unemployment, lowering living standards.

Is this the 9th of May good news story he wants to tell?

[adam2]

I consider that the risk of a nuclear weapon being used are relatively small, but are greater than was the case a year or two ago.

I suspect that a lot of putins nukes may be inoperable, but that is of little help. It is not the perhaps dozens of "duds" that are the worry, but the handful that DO function as intended.

If Russia DO resort to nuclear weapons, I have heard that the favoured western response is a huge attack but only with conventional weapons. "Doing a Dresden" is a currently popular phrase.

And of course various other unstable regimes have got or are working towards nuclear weapons, Iran and north korea have not gone away.

[careful_eugene]

I suspect that a lot of putins nukes may be inoperable, but that is of little help.

I believe that Russia have continued developing nuclear weapons since the demise of the Soviet Union, there's a lot of information on the internet with regard to the Avangard missile system. They're not relying on some cold war relics. https://eurasiantimes.com/russias-avang ... mbat-duty/

[clv101]

Have a watch of this for some quality information on the (increasing) risk of nuclear war, and what to do about it. I've known Nate for many years and Chuck for the last few years. He knows what he's on about:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvXO_rH ... NateHagens

[BritDownUnder]

Very interesting that interview. I was surprised by how light the 170kT yield warhead was - 700 pounds I think he said. The UK should invest in some to put in some unusual places.

I am not sure that the US should give much credence to the feelings of the dictators and gangsters in power in China and Russia when he said they were upset about the new US sub launched ballistic missile warhead. I would have though that that is the purpose of these things.

[kenneal - lagger]

....................
I am not sure that the US should give much credence to the feelings of the dictators and gangsters in power in China and Russia when he said they were upset about the new US sub launched ballistic missile warhead. I would have though that that is the purpose of these things.

They are like spoilt children not getting their way; it's OK for them to develop and test new toys but when the west do so we're bad people so they throw their toys out of the pram.

It's the same in Ukraine where Putin is complaining about the west arming the Ukrainians when the Soviet Union and then Russia have been arming, training and, in Korea, directly assisting with pilots and aircraft the communist and anti west insurgents to kill western forces ever since WW2. Now the boot is on the other foot Putin is stamping his little feet and rattling his nuclear toys.

[Vortex2]

Is anyone preparing for an EMP incident?

A high altitude nuclear burst over Europe would zap most of our high tech electronics.

Has anyone stashed any PCs etc away in metal boxes etc just in case?

[Catweazle]

Is anyone preparing for an EMP incident?

A high altitude nuclear burst over Europe would zap most of our high tech electronics.

Has anyone stashed any PCs etc away in metal boxes etc just in case?

I have a couple of old laptops, two-way radios, and a normal AM/FM radio in a metal filing cabinet in a metal shipping container. Solid fuel stove will take care of heating and cooking because the solid state combi boiler control and the induction hob will be toast.

Redundant but working electronics are consigned to the shipping container, so there is a possibility of working TV / DVD / stereo systems too.

All modern cars will be screwed, I can't think what to do about that, but my tractors and vintage motorbikes will survive. Even the lawnmower has electronic ignition.

[BritDownUnder]

Is anyone preparing for an EMP incident?

A high altitude nuclear burst over Europe would zap most of our high tech electronics.

Has anyone stashed any PCs etc away in metal boxes etc just in case?

Yes, yes and yes.

The most precious of my items, multimeters, to check what things may have survived are contained within four layers of metallic surroundings, a metal shed, a metal filing cabinet, a metal toolbox and then wrapped in foil just to be sure.

[BritDownUnder]

....................
I am not sure that the US should give much credence to the feelings of the dictators and gangsters in power in China and Russia when he said they were upset about the new US sub launched ballistic missile warhead. I would have though that that is the purpose of these things.

They are like spoilt children not getting their way; it's OK for them to develop and test new toys but when the west do so we're bad people so they throw their toys out of the pram.

It's the same in Ukraine where Putin is complaining about the west arming the Ukrainians when the Soviet Union and then Russia have been arming, training and, in Korea, directly assisting with pilots and aircraft the communist and anti west insurgents to kill western forces ever since WW2. Now the boot is on the other foot Putin is stamping his little feet and rattling his nuclear toys.

Another thing he seemed upset about was the INF treaty that apparently has just lapsed. If I understand that treaty correctly there were two problems with it. The Russians were beginning to cheat (and lets face it with the current black-is-white and white-is-black government in charge it is not surprising) and also the Chinese were not signatories and using it to target US bases Guam and Japan and also deploy carrier killer missiles without US being able to respond in kind.