Author Topic: How USA is planning first-strike nuke attack on Russia (Read 1990 times)

Matthew · « **Reply #5 on:** June 14, 2014, 10:43:24 PM »

Quote from: ascent

If there is an all-out nuclear exchange between the U.S. and Russia, then human life will cease to exist on earth. Let me put this in perspective for everyone:
Quote
The Tsar Bomba was a three-stage Teller–Ulam design Lithium bomb with a yield of 50 to 58 megatons of TNT (210 to 240 PJ). This is equivalent to about 1,350–1,570 times the combined power of the bombs that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki
LINK

Now, that bomb was developed and tested by (former) Soviet Union in 1961, and it's a dinosaur compared to the sophisticated U.S. & Russian nukes of today which can probably effect far greater destruction.

I agree with much of your post (about de-stabilizing the family, the evil purpose of wars against Christendom, etc.) but this part here I don't agree with.

Bombs don't necessarily double in power every 18 months. There is not a Moore's Law for atomic bombs. They don't just get more and more powerful every year or something. Atomic bombs are not computer processors.

On the contrary, what I've read is that the Soviet Union and the USA are now more into "strategic" nukes and lower yields, for various reasons. The nuclear strategies of the two countries in 1960 and 2000 are not the same.

For one thing, the smaller nukes are more useful -- you actually could use one (theoretically) without automatically igniting WW3, destroying an entire country, etc.

Matthew · « **Reply #6 on:** June 14, 2014, 10:47:20 PM »

Quote from: ihsv

Just because the author is a dumb-bell in one area, doesn't mean he doesn't have valuable information to share in another. Focus on the message and not the messenger.

I would recommend reading Nuclear War Survival Skills and plan accordingly.

Also, this site has some great info.

I agree.

To the person you're responding to (above):
It's up to you -- you can dismiss whomever.

But I caution you -- if you want to be consistent, you can only believe anything that comes from the mouth of a Traditional Catholic. Don't dismiss this important article and then blindly believe CNN. Spiritually speaking, they are just as destitute!

As I've said a million times (and +W taught me this concept):
If we limit our reading and our bookshelves to books written by SSPX Traditional Catholics (or CMRI Traditional Catholics, if that's your cup of tea) then you will not be reading much, and will have a VERY small library!

That's why +W invited all sorts of people to the Seminary over the years -- each of them was charged to speak on a very specific topic, on which they had a high degree competence. We weren't encouraged or asked to join any of their fan clubs.

ihsv · « **Reply #7 on:** June 16, 2014, 09:57:03 AM »

The reason for high-yield weapons was to compensate for the inherent inaccuracy of first generation ICBMs and gravity bombs. The first ICBMs could easily miss their targets by a few miles, and so the largest ICBM deliverable weapon of the soviet union was nearly 20 Megatons, large enough to make sure they hit what they were aiming at. With advancements in precision, The US's largest ICBM weapon is 375 Kiloton, while the Russian SS-18 carries a unitary warhead of 800 KT. As accuracy increases, the need for monster bombs decrease.

The Tsar Bomba, a 100MT device that was scaled down to 50MT for the test, was so large it was impractical and never put into service. It was meant as a show of force.

ihsv · « **Reply #8 on:** June 16, 2014, 10:03:03 AM »

And contrary to poplar belief, a nuclear war, even a full exchange, is survivable, provided certain precautions and preparations are made. If you don't live in or near a strategic target, likely the greatest threat you would face (aside from the hordes of zombies) would be from radioactive (gamma radiation) fallout. Protecting yourself is relatively easy, and the decay rate of the radiation is fairly rapid.