youtube.com/watch?v=2jy3JU-ORpo Science & Global Security (SGS) journal developed a new simulation for a plausible escalating war between the United States and Russia using realistic nuclear force postures, targets and fatality estimates. This four-minute audio-visual piece is based on independent assessments of current U.S. and Russian force postures, nuclear war plans, and nuclear weapons targets. It uses extensive data sets of the nuclear weapons currently deployed, weapon yields, and possible targets for particular weapons, as well as the order of battle estimating which weapons go to which targets in which order in which phase of the war to show the evolution of the nuclear conflict from tactical, to strategic to city-targeting phases.
>Russia nukes Germany and the UK >NATO immediately retaliates >by obliterating Poland, Ukraine, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia Oh no no no no no.
this is retarded. russia hasnt been relevant for 50+ years. china is going to be the problem, not russia
Brandon Allen
The video isn't good
Hunter Anderson
>Russia nukes NATO >NATO retaliates >by also nuking NATO wat
Jeremiah Davis
Yeah, not likely. Russian-US relations are cold sure, but nowhere near Obama-era levels. Trumps posture is Sino-centric, he's letting Poland be the Bulwark of the East. This whole thing is just there to stoke the fires of "Orange man bad" level hysteria. That's obvious.
True
Oh shut up you.
Anthony Lewis
OP says it all, this has to be the laziest work of scare mongering of the entire Trump era.
Noah Barnes
A thread died for this low effort shitpost
Julian Garcia
>Russia doesn't have nuclear subs parked off the US coasts. Uh... Yeah, sure.
Adam Cox
It's a design to look sort of plasuable while avoiding the elephant in the room.
A Russian tactical strike would result in a US attack on Russian delivery systems and assets via DT tridents.
Realistically, this would wipe out almost all Russian delivery systems before they could fire, ending the war with limited casualties and damage to Europe.
They can't sell a video of a winnable nuclear war, or Russian's vulnerability without any functional second-strike systems.
They don't. Russian boomers remain at dock where they act as functional stationary platforms. This works, but means in an American first strike or sudden escalation from a limited exchange that Russian delivery systems are very vulnerable. At sea it's unrealistic to imagine that Russian boomers could survive to launch under any circumstances.
Carson Nguyen
A good enough scare, but I don't have to be a fucking expert on nuclear war to know this is a obvious crock of shit. This might've been a plausible scenario 30-60 years ago, but not now. The US and Russia are smart enough to know nuking the hell out of each other is not gonna give any gains whatsoever. But I reckon somewhere out there, there has to be a thinktank or supercomputer finding a way to achieve a "success" that would involve the least damage to either country or the environment, not to mention the possibility of some super secret defense system. My two cents.
