4 ms·

Although it would not be difficult to locate a reference, I will back up what the post you’re replying to said. Before the concern of nuclear fallout, some thou

Although it would not be difficult to locate a reference, I will back up what the post you’re replying to said. Before the concern of nuclear fallout, some thought to use nukes as “mountain movers”. Think about that. How many mountains have humans been able to make? But we have a device that can largely obliterate one. Bunkers are all about surviving indirect blasts and protecting from radiation exposure. If you have a deep enough underground bunker, you largely protect yourself from a “direct blast,” but if a weapon burrowed anywhere near your bunker and detonated it’s good night. You’d also need nation-scale resources to build a bunker deep enough, and have air, water, vapor barriers, etc.

srvmshr 4y ago
> Although it would not be difficult to locate a reference, I will back up what the post you’re replying to said. Operation Plowshare. It was largely a failure in objectives. > a weapon burrowed anywhere near your bunker and detonated it’s good night What are the mathematical chances someone will burrow a sufficiently powerful nuclear device near a Cheyenne mountain type bunker without getting noticed by security, maintaining all the electrical supplies and fusing quietly over months/years, and at the apocalyptic moment manage to detonate it with VVIPs holed in? I bet the same chances as carrying it inside and detonating it.