If Putin decides to use nukes who will he target!??

[Questerr]

I asked you for links to the atmospheric studies...not Wikipedia. And if you think the atmospheric conditions in NV are similar to those all over the globe, including Ukraine, wow. As well as the radioactivity that would get into rivers and the Black Sea and Sea of Azov, etc?

You also dont seem to understand that Chernobyl didnt explode IN the upper atmosphere. It's radiation was released much differently.

A tactical nuclear strike wouldn’t explode in the upper atmosphere either. Nor would Russia likely target anything near the Black Sea or Sea of Azov.

 

[Dayton3]

Your pool of knowledge has been faulty almost 100% of the time in our discussions so I'm not bothering.

How is it faulty?

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

Weill he contaminate the Ukrainian with radiation as he is trying to conquer it???

Or will he retaliate against the countries that have supported them,

I’m worried the military bases in Alaska could be a target…

Even if he restricts use to battlefield nukes in Ukraine, he's done. Russia will be a permanent international pariah and will never recover economically or prestige wise. If he goes after those supporting Ukraine, he may as well be targeting himself, as the response will be nuclear as well.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Multiple atmospheric tests occurred at the Nevada Test Range in the 50-60KT range. That’s easily equal to or greater than the yield of modern tactical nukes.

Except most of the ones shown were NOT atmospheric.
A few were but many were underground and nowhere near 50 kilotons.

Door Mist was an underground test, so was Diesel Train, both less than 20kt.
In fact, most of the Crosstie series of shots were under 20kt.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Multiple atmospheric tests occurred at the Nevada Test Range in the 50-60KT range. That’s easily equal to or greater than the yield of modern tactical nukes.

Like I said, most of Russia's tests were at or near full scale, while most of ours were not.
Tsar Bomba was 50 MEGATONS, a test for the proposed one HUNDRED Mt bomb.
Even the smaller 50 Mt shot produced atmospheric lensing.


You're thinking of the 1957 Operation Plumbbob series, which definitely was way more than
fifty kilotons.

 

[Questerr]

Except most of the ones shown were NOT atmospheric.
A few were but many were underground and nowhere near 50 kilotons.

Door Mist was an underground test, so was Diesel Train, both less than 20kt.
In fact, most of the Crosstie series of shots were under 20kt.

It doesn't matter if *most* were underground. Multiple above ground tests were in the same yield range as modern tactical nukes.

They resulted in nothing even remotely like the contamination of all of Nevada.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

It doesn't matter if *most* were underground. Multiple above ground tests were in the same yield range as modern tactical nukes.

They resulted in nothing even remotely like the contamination of all of Nevada.

When one uses parameters like "ALL of Nevada", that is not a reasonable argument.
ALL and NOTHING are very rare things indeed. Always and never are a very long time.
All that having been said, so called "downwinders" are a real thing, people who suffered adverse health issues due to fallout.

 

[Questerr]

When one uses parameters like "ALL of Nevada", that is not a reasonable argument.
ALL and NOTHING are very rare things indeed. Always and never are a very long time.
All that having been said, so called "downwinders" are a real thing, people who suffered adverse health issues due to fallout.

Yet people are saying Putin wouldn’t be willing to use one or two nukes in Ukraine out of fear of contaminating the whole country.

 

[Lursa]

How is it faulty?

I dont even believe you used to be a school teacher based on the content of your posts. If so, that's also frightening.

I am not wasting my time on attempting a factual discussion with you.

 

[Lursa]

A tactical nuclear strike wouldn’t explode in the upper atmosphere either. Nor would Russia likely target anything near the Black Sea or Sea of Azov.

Both of those are likely true. Doesnt mean that that radiation would remain contained. Esp. regarding water systems. At all.

And you havent provided the sources for the atmospheric studies.

 

[Dayton3]

I dont even believe you used to be a school teacher based on the content of your posts. If so, that's also frightening.

I am not wasting my time on attempting a factual discussion with you.

I have proof in my avatar picture. But you are only interested in slandering me because it appeals to your biases.

 

[Lursa]

I have proof in my avatar picture. But you are only interested in slandering me because it appeals to your biases.

Then I believe your students were grossly underserved.

 

[Dayton3]

Then I believe your students were grossly underserved.

My test scores indicate otherwise.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Yet people are saying Putin wouldn’t be willing to use one or two nukes in Ukraine out of fear of contaminating the whole country.

To-mayto, to-mahto, po-tay-to, po-tahto...the point is, ANY detonation of ANY nuclear device is going to be a bridge too far for the free world to tolerate.
And it isn't as if Putin intends to let everyone know the size, weight and yield of what decides to detonate.

 

[Questerr]

Both of those are likely true. Doesnt mean that that radiation would remain contained. Esp. regarding water systems. At all.

And you havent provided the sources for the atmospheric studies.

What “atmospheric studies” are necessary? I provided a source for atmospheric testing in Nevada with yields comparable to modern tactical nukes. It’s plainly obvious that Nevada isn’t “contaminated”.

 

[Lursa]

My test scores indicate otherwise.

Your posts are clear evidence otherwise.

And they're really the only proof you have.

 

[Lursa]

What “atmospheric studies” are necessary? I provided a source for atmospheric testing in Nevada with yields comparable to modern tactical nukes. It’s plainly obvious that Nevada isn’t “contaminated”.

You made a claim. And now are backpedaling.

And Wikipedia isnt a source I'm interested in for this. (As previously posted, "Nevada" isnt the same as Ukraine or many other environments across the globe).

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

What “atmospheric studies” are necessary? I provided a source for atmospheric testing in Nevada with yields comparable to modern tactical nukes. It’s plainly obvious that Nevada isn’t “contaminated”.

Over a trillion cubic feet of water in Nevada is contaminated.

Nevada's hidden ocean of radiation

A sea of ancient water tainted by the Cold War is creeping deep under the volcanic peaks, dry lake beds and pinyon pine forests covering a vast tract of Nevada.

www.latimes.com

 

[Dayton3]

Over a trillion cubic feet of water in Nevada is contaminated.

Nevada's hidden ocean of radiation

A sea of ancient water tainted by the Cold War is creeping deep under the volcanic peaks, dry lake beds and pinyon pine forests covering a vast tract of Nevada.

www.latimes.com

Depends what you mean by "contaminated". You know there are vastly different levels of radioactive contamination.

 

[Questerr]

Over a trillion cubic feet of water in Nevada is contaminated.

Nevada's hidden ocean of radiation

A sea of ancient water tainted by the Cold War is creeping deep under the volcanic peaks, dry lake beds and pinyon pine forests covering a vast tract of Nevada.

www.latimes.com

Out of a total of how many trillions of cubic feet of water in the state?

 

[Questerr]

You made a claim. And now are backpedaling.

And Wikipedia isnt a source I'm interested in for this. (As previously posted, "Nevada" isnt the same as Ukraine or many other environments across the globe).

What is the magical barrier that prevents tactical yield nuclear detonations from contaminating all of Nevada that wouldn’t exist in Ukraine?

 

[Gaius46]

He's not nuking a NATO country. That would be suicidal and even if he is that stark raving mad the people around him likely aren't.

He most probably won't nuke Ukraine either. What sense is there in nuking a country you want that also sits on your border?

 

[Gaius46]

Except it wouldn’t. We did atmospheric nuclear tests for years. The effects of one or two nukes are not that catastrophic in terms of fallout.

Nevada is mostly unoccupied desert. Ukraine is mostly occupied farmland so I don't think the comparison is apt.

 

[Questerr]

Nevada is mostly unoccupied desert. Ukraine is mostly occupied farmland so I don't think the comparison is apt.

So you can demonstrate how all of that unoccupied desert is contaminated?

 

[Gaius46]

So you can demonstrate how all of that unoccupied desert is contaminated?

It's unoccupied. No one gives a damn about radioactive sand. Today none is contaminated - the radiation from fallout of those tests is apparently still detectable though apparently just barely.
Nuke land you actually care about and you render it unusable for years to decades. Even a relative small ground blast would likely contaminate thousands of square miles of land