Is total nuclear warfare out of the question in a post Chernobyl world?

I can’t see a potential nuclear war going anywhere beyond “tactical” strikes. The idea of hitting all the nuclear power plants in a country after what we know from events such as Chernobyl and Fukushima is suicidal

Am I wrong?

Attached: 4391F62F-04D8-4864-B921-C52FA5171955.jpg (240x310, 28K)

Chernobyl happened due to complete negligence combined with an inherent design flaw whereas Fukushima happened because someone somewhere was too retarded to acknowledge the fact that the big island country that gets a fuckton of earthquakes also gets a fuckton of big tsunamis. Elsewhere nuclear plants are built to withstand armageddon especially after 1986 and especially in the US.

take this and all the nuke subs they sink and you know that nuclear warfare simple doesn't exist, russian nukes 100% don't work, not to say their missiles, 100% chance that the few that don't get destroyed in their own silos when trying to launch will be caught in the US missile defence system, nuclear warfare is a meme, only the US have ICBM nukes that work, if anything russian and other subhuman nukes are all more of a danger to their own people when they fail than to any enemy

>The idea of hitting all the nuclear power plants in a country
Is a waste of warheads. You target the enemy arsenal above anything else, to reduce his position in the post-exchange negotiating session. Targeting silly shit like power plants, overpasses, train stations, and freeway interchanges is how you lose a nuke war. All of those things can be taken out by cruise missiles with conventional warheads.

Yes and no. Even now we make nukes to air burst. Loads less fallout, better destructive effect
BUT
We've been conditioned that that'd be the end. That to use it would be a last resort. When nation is more than humanity.

When they fly, the all will. And we'd be crashing that shit into the earth. Fuck em, fuck us. Now we're all sons of bitches

Attached: 1565753936088.jpg (787x496, 49K)

Regardless infrastructure such as power plants have taken precedent in hypothetical scenarios

Things like corn fields and artichoke canneries have also taken precedent in hypothetical scenarios. That doesn’t mean the people in charge of doctrine and strategy are going to prioritize silly shit. There are only 60 nuke power plants in the US, targeting them isn’t even a good countervalue strategy. If an opponent wanted to target the energy infrastructure, 2 or 3 warheads optimized for EMP and detonated at high altitude would do a much better job.

All of these gay ass hypotheticals and supposed target maps aren’t even good propaganda. Nukes aren’t a limitless resource. Any target that warrants a nuke is going to have more than 1 warhead dedicated to making sure that target absolutely dies. In the case of power plants, that means at least 120 warheads dedicated to just that task. In turn, that takes those warheads away from striking places like Point Loma, Minot, Bangor, New London, Offut, and the missile fields. Those targets present a very real existential threat to a nuclear opponent. Power plants do not.

Chernobyl was CIA sabotage. investigators found military grade cesium in the debris, which is only found in US bombs and not RBMK reactors. dont believe everything HBO tells you.

...soon

Except California

Attached: usplatesrockymountainsmapmaprefrencemapusnuclearpowerplantsusnuclearmapnewusplatesrockyofusplatesroc (1024x713, 176K)

based and delusional pilled

Hate to break it to you but rbmk reactors fucking explode when they’re run by Gopniks with nigger tier iq
Eat a fat cock Ivan.

Attached: 637C34F0-D027-4E28-B24A-310E8737A3ED.jpg (540x504, 42K)

Attached: 1557344661630.png (900x676, 410K)

the fukushima event was a number of things that were outside of their control anyways
it has the day of the high tide
the earthquake itself lowered japan 30cm
the movement the earthquake caused to the plane made it to shift completely back to its prior size unloading all of the land which was roughly 3.8 meters according to ptwc
even if they had a 15 meters wall protecting the plant they would still be fucked

Now this is vatnik posting

Attached: 1B93B49B-8B15-452E-942C-B1C9775B6B17.jpg (400x262, 22K)

>rbmk reactors fucking explode when they’re run by Gopniks with nigger tier iq
They were fucking badly designed, that's why Soviets retrofitted other such reactors after Chernobyl.

Now that's some graphite.

Bullshit, but I believe it.

Attached: serious discussion.jpg (1023x745, 94K)

they were working pretty much as intented up untill that point

they just removed the idiots and added some safety measure to prevent retards from making it critical again

nuclear war is out of question cause russian nukes don't work, that's why they invented the whole "nuclear winter" fiction, they know their missiles and nukes are shit and had to find a way to discourage the west from using theirs, chernobyl was all about that

i'm sorry but positive void coefficient is a bad design

>military grade cesium

this meme again, nationalism really makes people blind

The exact same can be said of TMI and what happened afterwards. The Feds hammered down on the industry pretty hard due to public pressure and obvious reasons.

I know right? Is that cesium with a foregrip?

Ok then nigger, why haven't the US invaded Russia yet if you are so sure their shit ain't working?

yes and literally chernobyl happened because of human error and not the core just randomly spiking up and blowing itself you know

there is a massive difference

I mean, other than the fact that nobody died.

>are built to withstand armageddon especially after 1986 and especially in the US.
Was that the three mile island meltdown?

Why would anyone ever want to invade Russia?

Because we don't want AIDS
That's why we didn't invade in 1947 whrn we were the only ones that had nukes

great question, but I guess it has more to do with nobody in the west having a stomach for a war where we could lose somewhere around 50k people and kill millions than anything else

yeah do understimate your foes, that always ends well

>t.

Attached: 1564955093948.png (1062x942, 301K)

An air burst fire ball that touches the ground would make retarded amounts of fallout, what are you even talking about lmao

the fuck is this?

Attached: 1565969144665.jpg (2204x2417, 1.54M)

absolutely not graphite

>Targeting silly shit like power plants, overpasses, train stations, and freeway interchanges is how you lose a nuke war.
Targeting silly shit things like nuclear power plants will make it impossible to enemy economically recover from the war. Nuking trainyards prevent movement of troops, equipment and everything else for more than a while.
>All of those things can be taken out by cruise missiles with conventional warheads.
Cruise missile with conventional warheads doesn't take targets like nuclear power plants or trainyards out of action for long time. Ground burst nuke will take 'em out for good.

Huh. I never knew South Carolina had a heightened risk of earthquake. Reading some articles now, looks like SC is at risk of a major earthquake within 50 years. Interesting.

A modern H bomb detonated at altitude would generate much, much less fallout.

Three Mile Island was 1979, Chernobyl was 1986. Chernobyl got way more publicity and caused a lot of countries to update designs.

>4th generarion weapons uses a non-fission reaction to ignite and initate a fusion reaction. The non-fission triggers usually involves either an anti-matter bomb or advanced type of thermomagnetic flux resonance trigger.
>a 4th generation thermofusion warhead can have extremely high yield (above 50mt range) and will produce every little fallout making it an ideal weapon for strategic and tactical warfare.

Attached: neutron-bomb.gif (300x263, 20K)

>The idea of hitting all the nuclear power plants

Why would you do that instead of targeting the enemy nations own nuclear missile systems as well as the command and control elements of that system?

Read a book sometime and stop posting

Fallout from the missles isn’t the problem, potential reactor breachs are.
And in the midst of a war the man power needed to contain it and clean it up are strained, or just nonexistent

They're not designed to do that.

Attached: cold-war-111.jpg (780x1024, 298K)

no country uses high yield nukes anymore. way too much collateral destruction. they were only that big in the cold war because back then missiles were very inaccurate.

it's all about accuracy and efficiency now. that means low yield nukes which are extremely accurate.

Both the US and Russia still field at least some 1+ megaton warheads tho right?

Like the other user said, nuclear war is a meme outside of small tactical strikes. After WW1 people feared that biological and chemical weapons would be the norm in WW2, yet they saw very limited deployment and that was mainly from the Japanese against China, neither of whom experienced gas attacks in WW1. The same shit is going to hold true for WW3 and nukes, everyone will think they are going to be used liberally for them to only see limited conservative use.

Nuclear winter is a Hollywood fiction. If you disagree then you are the blind fool here.

Read a book. There were many factors. They certainly weren’t low iq. The reactor operator Tuptonov had graduated from their top science institute. He was inexperienced though and made some critical mistakes during the simulated power failure test. No doubt under extreme pressure from the test supervisor Dyatlov. A giga chad who you could blame most of the operator error for causing the accident. The soviets cheaped out on the RBMK design too, in part because it could be manufactured by existing soviet factories without expense of retooling with much higher design specifications. The design institute and designers were aware of the reactor flaw with graphite tipped moderators, but kept this a secret from everyone (ALL of the RBMK power plant operators in the USSR right up to the CCP). They did in fact outline to power plant operators in updated manuals never to run the reactors in a low power setting, but they never stressed severity of why, because they could not be seen to be admitting to the flaw. Regardless, in Dyatlov’s overconfidence, impatience & ignorance he chose to ignore this. The overconfidence in the Soviets in having mastered the atom for peaceful purposes seemed to be fairly entrenched thinking within the industry and state. As a consequence, safety at all NPPs was considered severely lacking. Accidents were almost the norm and covered up at any rate. Couple this with the endemic soviet mentality of absolute secrecy, “covering ones arse”, “cheap and good enough”, climbing the communist party ladder with all its inherent privileges, and the constant pressure to meet often unrealistic (production) targets...it’s a perfect recipe for a disaster.

Please. The main problem with Fukushima was the retarded placement, but personnel made plenty of fuckups as well.
If memory serves me right:
>the cooling system which could have worked without electricity was disabled
>it was supposed to always be enabled (as it's impossible to enable once the electricity goes)
>they didn't notice it isn't, assumed it was operating and took it easy until things suddenly went to shit
>did not report the problem to anyone until the situation was critical
>failed to feed water into the reactor for hours, as nobody ever bothered to learn how to do it
>eventually figured it out, but at this point it was too late as pressure was too high to pump the water inside
>when pressure suddenly dropped, failed to realize what it means (internal shielding was ruptured) and poured water inside
>water boiled and caused a further raise in pressure, rupturing the external shielding too and eventually causing an explosion
>only then they decided to release the pressure into the atmosphere (which would have likely prevented explosion if done before feeding water)
>as they've been working on a single core, situation on other cores was deteriorating as well, but they were ignored until they went critical too
>watched the first core blow up after their actions
>proceeded to do exactly the same things to the second core
>watched the second core blow up after their actions, because why the fuck it wouldn't, they did exactly the same things
>only then understood that you shouldn't try to repeat the same thing, and saved the third core
>fourth core exploded instead

>wouldn't invade Russia because "ehhh not feeling like it" but proceed to fight in the frozen rocky shitscape of korea, the sweltering asscrack of satan in Vietnam, and the dusty armpit of Afghanistan/Iraq

>make it impossible to enemy economically recover from the war
Which is fucking pointless because the war will be long over before the economic aspects make themselves known, you absolute mong. Same with troop movements, dipshit. Every warhead wasted on that nonessential shit is one less warhead available for either the negotiations after the exchange, or for attacking the enemy arsenal during the exchange. Protip, fool; don’t use a nuke on a target that costs less than the nuke. Read a fucking book, you ignorant gay nigger.

Cooling system was disabled because the backup diesel generators for running the pumps were in the flooded out basement.

past:
>one man cannot destroy all life
present
>a few men can destroy all alife
future
>anyone can destroy all life

there are many methods of achieving this result, such as biological, nuclear, chemical, maybe AI...
>senators act in their own interest, they are not likely to use the bomb because state capitals get taken out first

>when your absolute shit-tier design, building, testing, and safety protocols blow up in your face but you also need to not look incompetent or weak so you claim that enemy forces were able to deploy sabotage teams deep into your territory and destroy vital infrastructure

I'm more afraid of AI domesticating humans either by accident or on purpose. A Caretaker style AI could easily engineer a breeding program to get rid of dangerous things like violent tendencies, curiosity, etc.

humm I wonder who they would get ride of?

It was supposed to be always enabled, so you don't need to waste time turning it on it in case of emergency.
Backup generators could have been used to enable it if they worked, but it should have never been disabled in the first place.