When will China join the Armageddon Club? - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in Europe's nation states, the E.U. & Russia.

Moderator: PoFo Europe Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please. This is an international political discussion forum, so please post in English only.
#15203086
late wrote:If you have even one nuke with a delivery system, you're a member.


I doubt this. Let us say Iran would detonate 1 nuke in orbit (to avoid US Air Defense). In orbit is a nuke, a huge EMP... but The US could end the 7000 year old persian history with a 1000 nuclear bomb strike as answer.
#15203092
Sandzak wrote:I doubt this. Let us say Iran would detonate 1 nuke in orbit (to avoid US Air Defense). In orbit is a nuke, a huge EMP... but The US could end the 7000 year old persian history with a 1000 nuclear bomb strike as answer.

Hopefully we wouldn't do that. Just one small nuke to kill their 'supreme leader'. And if we could end him with a conventional strike, they might try that first.
#15203141
Sandzak wrote:
I doubt this. Let us say Iran would detonate 1 nuke in orbit (to avoid US Air Defense). In orbit is a nuke, a huge EMP... but The US could end the 7000 year old persian history with a 1000 nuclear bomb strike as answer.



That is a reasonable thought. It just happens to be wrong. It's human psychology, as soon as a country becomes a nuclear power, we treat them a little nicer.
#15203144
How many nukes are actually required? Then there is the cost to maintain them. I suspect China already has enough with over 300 to "disinfect the world". And really the question we should be asking ourselves are how efficient are the warheads of both Russia and America? Most times quantity doesn't equate to quality.
#15203146
B0ycey wrote:
How many nukes are actually required? Then there is the cost to maintain them. I suspect China already has enough with over 300 to "disinfect the world". And really the question we should be asking ourselves are how efficient are the warheads of both Russia and America? Most times quantity doesn't equate to quality.



The reason America and Russia have made a number of treaties reducing the nuclear threat is because the numbers don't matter much. Imagine this, let's say you have a dozen nukes, and you use them to take out LA, DC, NYC and a couple places like Silicon Valley. The country would never completely recover...
#15203149
late wrote:The reason America and Russia have made a number of treaties reducing the nuclear threat is because the numbers don't matter much. Imagine this, let's say you have a dozen nukes, and you use them to take out LA, DC, NYC and a couple places like Silicon Valley. The country would never completely recover...


Of course. But isn't that what I said?

But in terms of "disinfecting the planet" though which was the OPs main point, it isn't the ability to nuke cities or to allow the country to recover that matters in doing that but the fallout that comes with detonation. How many bombs are actually needed for that? Ten in each continent perhaps. Let's say 50 to be sure. That is 300 nukes. And China has more than that. So, yes Russia and America have far more than enough to wipe us all out, but as it turns out so does China. And quantity doesn't mean quality in any case. How many bombs by America and Russia have been maintained to still be useful? Not all of them is my guess.
#15203205
Scamp wrote:China does not need more nukes. They have already gotten away with the most sinister biological warfare attack in history. That was just a test run.


Entertaining this point. A nuke is far better as it is a precision device. Unlike a virus.
#15203206
Rancid wrote:
Entertaining this point. A nuke is far better as it is a precision device. Unlike a virus.



Nobody does biowarfare because it will come back at you, and rip your ass off.

Is that what you mean?
#15203209
Rancid wrote:Entertaining this point. A nuke is far better as it is a precision device. Unlike a virus.

That's true. However, using a nuke will bring international condemnation, and maybe a nuke response. China released the virus with little or no consequences.
#15203214
Scamp wrote:China released the virus with little or no consequences.


Have we seen the evidence of this yet?

Perhaps the worse thing any nation can do is tell the world they found a virus (and by extension a new variant). You are forever brandished with association and blame. I once read that the virus came out of a lab in America and there was also a claim this was a US state sponsored project in Wuhan where the virus somehow was realised. I don't believe either of those stories by the way but I would say that if this was a biological weapon it is fucking bollocks given the death rate is less than 1%. Hardly Anthrax.
#15203216
Scamp wrote:
Not when all of your chosen citizens have been inoculated.



There was no vaccine, and the one they did come up with isn't as good as ours.

I saw the emoji, but my take is you're undermining your own argument. Not that there was much there to undermine..
#15203218
B0ycey wrote:Have we seen the evidence of this yet?

Perhaps the worse thing any nation can do is tell the world they found a virus (and by extension a new variant). You are forever brandished with association and blame. I once read that the virus came out of a lab in America and there was also a claim this was a US state sponsored project in Wuhan where the virus somehow was realised. I don't believe either of those stories by the way but I would say that if this was a biological weapon it is fucking bollocks given the death rate is less than 1%. Hardly Anthrax.

Like I said, it was a test run.
Roe V. Wade to be Overturned

Women need to be punished for having sex. It's as[…]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

Russians have always been a piece of ship group of[…]

I don’t think my chicken brain grasps the enormity[…]

There is a huge disagreement over those deaths. T[…]