Would a nuclear exchange with Russia necessary mean armageddon

I used to have this bookmarked, couldn't find it. Came up with an easy search though.

nuclearsecrecy.com...

I picked washington, dc a 100MT Tsar and a ground blast.

over 2 million dead, fallout would stretch all the way to maine.

Russia is not going to get into a nuclear exchange with the usa. Russia knows about our flashlight. They dont want 511 problems. They dont want fog banks. They dont want any light shined on their problems and they like their modes just the way they are and not spun the wrong way.

They saw what happened to north korea. China saw what happened too. Neither want any of that.

originally posted by: JAY1980
a reply to: Golantrevize
Only one is needed anymore...

Russia has revealed its biggest ever nuclear missile which is powerful enough to destroy a country as big as France with a single strike

Source
While America was simply reducing it's nuclear capabilities the Russians were doing the same but updating their systems. Something we should have done as well. Now we are rather out gunned...

Aw contrare mon frare☺ its russia thats out gunned. Still playing with fission and fusion and neutrons. HA!!! Thats weaksauce. If they think they have us outgunned, well, they havent been enlightened yet.

originally posted by: dantanna
what we should do. is round up the top 100 people who run the world, the true internationalists, and let them knife fight each other till one person is standing. then there would be no war for a few months, then do it again, and again till they all kill each other.

if these bastards want war, let them kill each other off.

there is only about 100 people or less truly deciding these events. its a shame we cannot just take away their power so no regular people will by hypnotized into killing.

That would require a global abduction event with advanced unidentified flying objects all at once extracting.
Theoretically why some play chess removing the board...
If they were replaced by bots that began to work to build a better world would the population notice 👀

Well last year Russia did a live drill with 40 million citizens getting to shelters etc in a simulated attack whilst in the USA you have something called duck and cover I believe

originally posted by: khnum
Well last year Russia did a live drill with 40 million citizens getting to shelters etc in a simulated attack whilst in the USA you have something called duck and cover I believe

More like Book and cover, put a book on your head and whistle the star spangled banner.

Heres a fun game anybody here have any idea what im talking about?

a reply to: Golantrevize

Have you heard of M.A.D. (mutually assured destruction)? There would be no "let's nuke one city each and then talk it out".

But if you mean Armageddon as in "the supposed religious war of destruction where the forces of the Antichrist/Dajjal/Armilus/whoever fights the Prophet Jesus/the Mahdi/the real Jewish Savior/whoever", then probably not. lol Why would a nuclear clash between the US & Russia trigger Armageddon when neither of the 2 World Wars triggered it?

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
Heres a fun game anybody here have any idea what im talking about?

Scalar weapons? Rail guns? Tesla death Ray?

a reply to: PokeyJoe

Nope, especially not the railgun. but i like the direction youre going with the other two. Errr. No scalar. A different process. I gave a numerical hint in one of my above posts. If i were you id have lept on that clue. I wouldnt read this and be all negative though im positive you can figure it out.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

I'm thinking more God caused events to coalesce into Armageddon. It was pre-ordained. Only God knows the time.

" Why would a nuclear clash between the US & Russia trigger Armageddon"

So in essence, it's the other way around... that is, speaking as a Christian.

Your Avatar would suggest another faith ....Islam, which may view the scriptures in perhaps a different polar view.

a reply to: Golantrevize

To answer your question, yes it probably would but not for the whole world but it would in the topical if not the religious sense, Armageddon is believed to be named after a hill in the middle east were the army's will converge for the final battle but it would be for the west, most of Russia especially it's industry and major population center's (it is a vast country) and most of the northern hemisphere, it would also eventually effect the southern hemisphere but there are few prime taget's there, the after effect's would cause cancer's and illness as well as likely radiation poisoning for even most of the un-involved nation's - especially in the northern hemisphere and depending on how much fallout is cast into the atmosphere as well as poisonous radioactive rain and dust fall the climate would be devastated leading to post nuclear war famine and potentially triggering a new ice age.

There are two types of nuclear scenario.

Limited Exchange, this is one were the full blown war is stopped by the politician's before it get's out of hand, usually also called a tactical nuclear exchange.

Full nuclear war, Russia's still active and indeed updated DEAD HAND system would make this an unavoidable outcome of any nuclear exchange between the super power's, it is essentially a system that automatically launches ALL nuclear missiles in Russia and was conceived as part of the shared MAD policy's with the then Soviet's former opposite numbers in the west.

MAD is a western acronym but it translates well into there language as well, most appropriate if you think about it because M.A.D. stand's for Mutual Assured Destruction, in other word's wipe me out and I will also wipe you out.

During the cold war the Russian's were even working on creating the largest nuclear device yet conceived by the human race as a fail safe, this was going to be a very large ship packed with fissionable material that would sail constantly around the sea coast's of the Soviet Block and if it's sensor's detected elevated radiation that could only mean a nuclear strike had taken place against Russia (wonder what would have happened if Chernobyl had been mistake for such) then the weapon would have detonated, the idea was in fact to make the entire planet, not just the west but everywhere totally uninhabitable and to wipe out all human life, thankfully it was never built (I hope).


Here is some food for thought, there is a distinct possibility according to a Nuclear physicist from the US that the planet mars was actually destroyed by a large nuclear explosion, he believes there may be two site's indicating very large nuclear devices used on the planet due to specific isotopes that only come from nuclear fission of the type that occurs in a nuclear blast and that one, the killer was a bomb that if we built it to our science would be about the size of the empire state building, if we built it that is, the guy is a Proper scientist, not all agree but he is basing it on his own growing belief that this happened and he knew that damage this would do to his reputation but decided he had to share his finding's anyway, that said if he is correct maybe this would then be the second time we messed up our world.
www.digitaljournal.com...

a reply to: Golantrevize

originally posted by: Golantrevize
a reply to: FauxMulder

100s of nuclear bomb have exploaded already on earth. If it was only a few bombs i dont see the fallout being such a huge problem.

I hope to hell you do not have access to nuclear launch codes...Yes fallout is a huge problem not only at sites of nuclear detonations but at sites that have had nuclear reactor meltdowns.

Sources to read:
www.quora.com...

www.theguardian.com...

These discuss incidents decades old and involve weapons with yields in the kilotons, most nations with nuclear weapons now have yields in the megatons.

a reply to: darkbake

At the time, the U.S. was the only one with nukes

Wrong.

The nuclear bomb was a co produced by Britain The U.S.and Canada. The U.S. did not have sole ownership of " The Bomb ".

For logistic reasons it was The U.S. that dropped the Bombs on Japan.

Secondly, that we will not use it against third parties without each other's consent.

www.atomicarchive.com...

a reply to: alldaylong

True, we brit's were at least from what little we know today actually the leaders in development of the nuclear bomb but all our research, scientists and material's were shipped to the state's were Oppenheimer became the lead scientist and ended up getting all the credit - and infamy.
In reality though despite the destruction of there heavy water plant we really don't know how close the NAZI's were to developing there own, it is estimated they were about two year's behind us but the truth may be much more scary.

If this is true they were not only close but had already tested one, how and why did they fail to field it, perhaps the scientists involved were men of conscience and took that knowledge to there grave to prevent the NAZI's getting it.
news.bbc.co.uk...

The reason some scientist's (including some British) shared there knowledge with the Soviet's was not because of pro communist sympathy's but because they had become alarmed at how some of the US top brass wanted to use the Atom bomb against Russia and realized they had made a mistake letting the cat out of the box, they reasoned therefore that if everyone had them then they would not be used and this may be the true origin of MAD long before it was coined as a term in the west.

a reply to: LABTECH767

All that you state is correct.

At the onset of WW II Britain was miles ahead of others in developing The Bomb. Churchill agreed to give our research to The U.S. to develop The Bomb. For obvious reasons if we had built The Bomb alone ( which we had the capability to do ) we had nowhere to test it , being such a small island state.

Let's not forget it was in Britain that the atom was first " split " America likes to take full credit but we know the truth.

In a nuclear war, like all other wars, the commander-in-chief decides what sort of attack or response his nation will do. It could be one bomb or a few or all of them. If it was one only, it could be targetted at the capital city, or anywhere else, or even at a naval ship. It could be the largest bomb or the smallest. It's all up to the commander.

Our leaders are absolutely positively insane.

They are NOT civilized or reasonable people, NONE OF THEM ARE!

Trump wants to brag that the US has more nuclear weapons that anybody like it’s a contest or reality game

You wonder why theirs aliens flying all over the skies since 1945 when humankind found the atomic bomb.

Sure, if Russia and the US start a nuclear war its likely will be the last war.

Russia has 8000 nuclear weapons and the US has 7300…

originally posted by: iTruthSeeker
a reply to: Golantrevize

I guess not if they just took pot shots. 1 city for 1 city. Now if they launch everything then yea.

oh goodie