real nuclear war!

General discussion about Defcon

Moderator: Defcon moderators

What do you think would happen in an event of REAL nuclear war?

Poll ended at Mon Jul 14, 2008 12:05 am

Humanity would perish and never come back.
10
32%
Humanity would recover.
13
42%
Shit happens
8
26%
 
Total votes: 31
Protect and survive
level1
level1
Posts: 59
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 10:51 pm
Location: London in a mushroom cloud

real nuclear war!

Postby Protect and survive » Sat Apr 05, 2008 12:05 am

The ground burnt to a crisp and people burning in the heat, blood every where and homeless people roaming the streets. This is REAL nuclear war and i dont know about you but when im playing i have a deep moral struggle. A nuke comes hurtling down on Lenningrad and i feel so very guilty.
If real nuclear war was underway what would be the consequences? I mean scientificly and socially. What would happen to the crops, agriculture and animals?
User avatar
Feud
level5
level5
Posts: 5149
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 8:40 pm
Location: Blackacre, VA

Postby Feud » Sat Apr 05, 2008 12:09 am

I personally think that man would survive, there are enough places in Africa and Central/South America that wouldn't be hit that I think man could eek things out. It would certainly be messy, and it might take centuries or more to get back to where we are now, but I think it could be survivable.

I would prefer not to find out if I'm right.
Protect and survive
level1
level1
Posts: 59
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 10:51 pm
Location: London in a mushroom cloud

Postby Protect and survive » Sat Apr 05, 2008 12:12 am

Are you nuts? We couldent survive we'd be fucked. :roll:
PROTECT+SURVIVE
User avatar
walrus47
level4
level4
Posts: 559
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2007 10:56 am

Postby walrus47 » Sat Apr 05, 2008 12:13 am

If you knew the answer then why ask?
User avatar
xander
level5
level5
Posts: 16869
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Highland, CA, USA
Contact:

Postby xander » Sat Apr 05, 2008 12:37 am

Protect and survive wrote:Are you nuts? We couldent survive we'd be fucked. :roll:

If you are going to give people the option of selecting various possibilities, then it is incumbent upon you respect the fact that other people have such differing opinions. As stated above, if you already knew the answer, why did you ask the question, you twit?

xander
User avatar
All American Mobster
level4
level4
Posts: 751
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 11:46 pm
Location: Upland, CA
Contact:

Postby All American Mobster » Sat Apr 05, 2008 1:55 am

Yea, i agree with Feud on this one.

It also may depend: hydrogen bomb or atom? a hydrogen bomb is 1000 times more powerful than an atom bomb, and they are more destructive when they are blown up in the sky.

There would be a huge death toll: for every one person who dies by the blast another four would be killed by the radiation.

Also many people may seek refuge in out-of-the-way places. For example, a boat in the USA might head for, say, Iceland, or move more north in Canada.

But of course if the bombs are launched from missles, people may have a limited ammount of time to escape or build a fallout shelter... bla bla bla

Yet (im sorry im still going. i should write a book) if the nation was on the verge of a nuclear war (Hint: THE COLD WAR!!!) people may have been preparing for it.

So yes I definently agree people would survive, the damage would be absolutely devastating, and the death toll, unbearable.



-$tanley
User avatar
Pox
level5
level5
Posts: 1786
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:23 am
Location: Melbourne

Postby Pox » Sat Apr 05, 2008 2:00 am

Depends how you define a real nuclear war... if it's simply between two superpowers, and played on a strategic and not genocidal level, there would be some adverse effects on the world-wide *sphere, but not much - however, even a war between two superpowers could spell the end of a breathable atmosphere for millennia if they exhausted their supplies... Both Russia and the USA have enough nukes to effectively purge the planet of human civilisation. I'm sure some people would survive in underground bunkers, but it would probably be the end of society as we know it if there were many fusion detonations at high altitude... especially if Russia ever built any of those fission-fusion-fission 200MT ones they were so reluctant to test. :/
User avatar
Feud
level5
level5
Posts: 5149
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 8:40 pm
Location: Blackacre, VA

Postby Feud » Sat Apr 05, 2008 3:17 am

Protect and survive wrote:Are you nuts? We couldent survive we'd be fucked. :roll:


Listen Astroboy, when you kicked off your time on this forum by making a complete idiot of yourself through your nonsensical postings and utter disregard for any form of forum etiquette, I tried to be nice and helpful in hopes that you would figure things and perhaps become a productive member of this forum.

If you disagree with me then fine, it's no skin off my back as it's already been well established that my opinions are normally in the minority on these forums, and one more person disagreeing isn't going to shatter my outlook on life. But when you ask for an opinion on a matter, and your reply to an honest and polite response is to dismiss the opinion in such a manner as to call its legitimacy as an opinion into question, you are just being a jerk. Nobody likes jerks.
User avatar
Pox
level5
level5
Posts: 1786
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:23 am
Location: Melbourne

Postby Pox » Sat Apr 05, 2008 3:32 am

Indeed, I think it's very unreasonable to call a poll on a topic and then flame anyone who doesn't share your opinion on the issue... what were you planning to get out of this post in the first place?
User avatar
All American Mobster
level4
level4
Posts: 751
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 11:46 pm
Location: Upland, CA
Contact:

Postby All American Mobster » Sat Apr 05, 2008 6:14 am

Pox wrote:Indeed, I think it's very unreasonable to call a poll on a topic and then flame anyone who doesn't share your opinion on the issue... what were you planning to get out of this post in the first place?


I must agree. The facts are all there.



-$tanley
homelessdiver
level0
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 5:24 am
Location: Boracay
Contact:

Postby homelessdiver » Sat Apr 05, 2008 6:14 am

In an actual nuke war, yes, humans will survive in limited capacity. But thats just war with adversaries. It is possible to wipe out humans although that would have to be a direct attempt to do so. One would need to focus on the planet instead of population targets. Jet streams and the ocean current would be the main factors. It would take some planning to put that much irradiated material in the air to kill off people in a few generation for some seriously remote areas that are to sparsely populated to waste a nuke on directly, like the north.

Example of that planning: One could irradiate much of Alaska and the Aleutian chain by the warm currents coming from Japan. But those currents are largely diverted by the mountain range that starts just east of Anchorage so depending much of the Yukon in Canada would be slow to receive it...and those people are fully self sufficient. Depending on the time of the year, it would carry up north to Fairbanks but not as far as Barrow. Something detonated directly in the deadzone of Yukon would be carried up north and precipitate out over the polar region. The north pole is really a fairly dirty area, unlike the south pole. However, aside from research stations, Antarctica is not populated and cannot be self-sufficient thru the winters, even at the Palmer station which is just outside the arctic circle.

Northern siberia would have the problem of gaining precipitation from other areas but the heaviest of these are in areas that people generally dont settle in.

One of the fastest clearing areas will be at 30 degrees Lat in both the northern and souther hemispheres where the subtropical high winds push everything either to the poles (precipitation/filtering) or to the Intertropical Convergence Zone around the equator where the common bands of storms and rain will also clear the air. Yes, they will still be bringing in radiation but those are the main driving effects of the globe, everything else is related to terrain or ocean currents.

Central Africa has the highest average temperatures and the least precipitation. Because the heated area is sooooo large, most of the convective currents rise up and move back out to sea long before they get to the interior....making it a fairly safe place against fallout, assuming it wasnt a target.

...not that I've given this any thought or anything.... :)
User avatar
All American Mobster
level4
level4
Posts: 751
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 11:46 pm
Location: Upland, CA
Contact:

Postby All American Mobster » Sat Apr 05, 2008 6:16 am

homelessdiver wrote:...not that I've given this any thought or anything.... :)


Seriously. you could just write a book you know. :lol:



-$tanley
User avatar
Pox
level5
level5
Posts: 1786
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:23 am
Location: Melbourne

Postby Pox » Sat Apr 05, 2008 6:39 am

homelessdiver wrote:<evil plan>


Someone shoot this guy before he ransoms the planet. :P
User avatar
NeoThermic
Introversion Staff
Introversion Staff
Posts: 6254
Joined: Sat Mar 02, 2002 10:55 am
Location: ::1
Contact:

Postby NeoThermic » Sat Apr 05, 2008 10:33 am

Pox wrote:
homelessdiver wrote:<evil plan>


Someone shoot this guy before he ransoms the planet. :P


It's ok, he'll only want... ONE MILLION DOLLARS!

NeoThermic
User avatar
Pox
level5
level5
Posts: 1786
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:23 am
Location: Melbourne

Postby Pox » Sat Apr 05, 2008 10:45 am

NeoThermic wrote:
Pox wrote:
homelessdiver wrote:<evil plan>


Someone shoot this guy before he ransoms the planet. :P


It's ok, he'll only want... ONE MILLION DOLLARS!

NeoThermic


Goddammit, I specifically refrained from doing that. :roll:

Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests