4 ms·
Possibly because the use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine is not any likelier, given the inevitable radioactive fallout that would drift east into Russia? I hate
by ianhawes 4y ago
Possibly because the use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine is not any likelier, given the inevitable radioactive fallout that would drift east into Russia?
I hate Putin, don’t get me wrong, but if he were to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine, this would not immediately trigger WW3 or armageddon.
- defrost 4y agoIn military thinking there's a whole class of bombs that can be "airburst" above cities and destroy everything with the shockwave while (perhaps paradoxically) having near zero fallout due to the core blast not intersecting the ground and irradiating soils etc. Bear in mind some 2,000 nuclear weapons have been detonated in tests with over 500 of those as atmospheric blasts. The most fallout generated in tests has been from ground level (or rather reef level) detonations that uplifted and irradiated vast amounts of material.
- hollerith 4y agoAny nuke can be fuzed to detonate at any altitude: there is no separate class of nukes that produce air bursts. But I agree with you that fallout from an air burst is minimal.