Disaster Possible multi-national airstrike on Syria expected in the next 72 hours - "I don't want to set the worrrld on firrreeee~"

  • Thread starter Thread starter RP 520
  • Start date Start date
Europe's air traffic control network has warned commercial aircraft to avoid Syrian airspace due to a possible strike being planned in the next 72 hours.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/9...-uk-france-chemical-attack-russia-eurocontrol

DEFCON has been lowered to 4 over reports of military amassing air forces and the potential risks of a Russia vs. U.S. conflict.
https://defconwarningsystem.com/2018/04/10/defcon-warning-system-update-4-10-18/

Supposedly the British RAF is on alert in Cyprus.

There's also unconfirmed reports of the U.S. moving missile cruisers around in the Mediterranean and aircraft in Eastern Iraq.
 
  • Informative
  • Feels
  • Like
Reactions: Sotha Sil, Jack Haywood, ISO'os and 59 others
Click to expand...
yawning sneasel said:
That's kinda exceptional. Why not strike supply chain infrastructure and manufacturing? Why care about soldiers who have no tanks or planes? I would put Detroit at the top of the list. Lotta empty factories to convert to war factories.
Click to expand...
Even sending one nuke at America probably means that Russia is getting turned into a parking lot anyway, so why not just go whole hog? They have almost 2,000 bombs, so they could vaporize the top 500 cities in America and still have more than enough left.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Postal Dude, Scratch This Nut and Shokew
yawning sneasel said:
That's kinda exceptional. Why not strike supply chain infrastructure and manufacturing? Why care about soldiers who have no tanks or planes? I would put Detroit at the top of the list. Lotta empty factories to convert to war factories.
Click to expand...

Simply put, the goal of a nuclear exchange is to target the areas you need to hit no matter what first. The missiles themselves and the command and support are highest first priority. The most powerful of the Russian Nukes are after these targets. Anything on that map in red gets the nasty stuff. Those missiles are underground in very hardened locations for a reason. They are built to survive a lot of destruction.

You have only so many nukes and so much you can target. You know the US does have some anti-missile capability and you also know that your nukes may not go off.

Something people are not used to is the idea of a "dud". They happen. The US has been saved a lot of times from its own stupidity by the saving grace that not all bombs go off.

Also remember that ICBMs are actual rocket science. While most rocket launches we see are carefully orchestrated and calculated events, a Nuclear exchange is not this type of event. A lot of things can and will go wrong in this. The US is still using tech from the 1980's to operate its missiles. (Like literal Floppy Disks and everything)

Many ICBM's will likely not launch properly, have issues with wind and reentry, go off in the silos, or much much worse.

A word you see a lot with Nuclear weapons is the word "redundancy". There are a lot of blanks in an actual nuclear exchange.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Informative
  • Agree
  • Feels
Reactions: Ravelord, Chaosbandit, uncleShitHeel and 14 others
AbuIstimnaAlKekistani said:
Maybe its brinkmanship, but brinkmanship has a habit of blowing up in your face.

North Korea is a third rate shit hole that has issues with feeding its people and which needed decades to develop nuclear weapons. Russia is a peer competitor and has enough nuclear weapons to destroy the United States many times over.

Want to know how a nuclear war plays out?
The US attacks Syria, Russia has said that they will defend Syria from such an attack. This includes targeting American platforms that launched the attack. The Russians sink an American warship. The Americans retaliate by sinking Russian warships near Syria and targeting Russian forces at Latakia's airport, largely destroying Russia's forces in Syria.

The Russians decide to retaliate somewhere else and a general war breaks out. The Russians eventually suffer a major loss. In an effort to stem the results of that loss they use nuclear weapons tactically, targeting American forces. The Americans retaliate against whats left of the Russian military, an air base or port facility. In the process they do major damage to a nearby urban center. The Russians see that as a strategic strike and start going after counter value targets.

If you think that this has no chance of happening, then you haven't been following things. To the Russians this isn't about Syria. This is about the Americans imposing their hegemony on an emerging multi-polar world. The Russians evidently see that if they back down here, the next domino will be Russia itself.
Click to expand...
And what of the US's major allies like the UK? Are they simply caught in the crossfire, or are they high priority to Russia too?
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: uncleShitHeel
In all serious, I kinda want to see how all the autistic larpers who have no combat experience or survival skills but truly believe they'd survive a zombie apocalypse would react to a nuclear war.
Unfortunately, if it really WAS that destructive, faggots like me would be the first to die.
 
  • Agree
  • Feels
  • Optimistic
Reactions: uncleShitHeel, Pistachio, Fork Cartel and 5 others
Thomas Paine said:
I wish all you "Fallout in real life" faggots would get individually nuked.
In case you haven't experienced it yourselves, the world ain't a videogame. You're not going be able to VATS a hobo so you can steal clean water off his corpse.
Click to expand...

>implying i don't want to be a ghoul in the new apocalypse world
>implying i am not routinely referred to as a ghoul already

you're tangling with the wrong gay ass NEET my man
 
  • Autistic
  • Dumb
  • Like
Reactions: zappi, ducktales4gameboy, uncleShitHeel and 10 others
The very thought of going to war over nothing when we have so fucking much of our shit to solve HERE in the US as is makes me sick to my stomach. Always has, always will.

Seriously, I hope nothing comes of this. I really fucking do - the idea that no one is doing something about this scares me; you guys may joke about this BS, but I know none of us would survive in a Fallout - type future, unless you're really good with weapons / fighting in general. So please, stop talking like this is some game to be won, thank you!

I, for one, will definitely be A-OK if all this results in is just Daily/Nightly News screaming matches between Trump & Putin + whomever else is involved and nothing else (that also includes no going anywhere near Syria - nothing's important there and it's best we leave the ME to just fuck itself up without us getting in their way. They can do bad all by themselves, since they don't have nukes to throw at anyone, anyway.).

We don't need this.

No one asked for this.

No one with their finger on the button, anyway. Fucking fools.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Autistic
Reactions: uncleShitHeel, Pistachio, Ginger Piglet and 6 others

NumberingYourState said:
No they voted for Trump to provoke the outrage culture.
Click to expand...

Worth it.

Anyway, I'd say that Russia would prevail in the conflict proposed above. They're less politically divided and have a population more capable of fighting the west. The lefties of the west aren't going to fight and those that can are probably sympathetic to Russia. The political right in most western countries is largely sympathetic to Russia as well. Europeans have neglected their armed forces to the point where they basically have nothing and Americas sphere's of influence are not loyal and would probably contribute little.

Would Russia be able to occupy Western Europe? Probably not due to the sheer distance and cost of occupation but a sweep eastward into the Baltics, Balkans and Central Europe before the establishing of an armistice is very possible.
 
  • Dumb
  • Agree
  • Autistic
Reactions: ICametoLurk, BestUserName, Lysol and 2 others
Thomas Paine said:
I wish all you "Fallout in real life" faggots would get individually nuked.
In case you haven't experienced it yourselves, the world ain't a videogame. You're not going be able to VATS a hobo so you can steal clean water off his corpse.
Click to expand...
Even as a fan of the post-apocalyptic genre, I know I wouldn't want to live there! The reason these places make for interesting fiction is partially because of how hostile and all the bad scenarios that they can have. It wouldn't be fun because it's not a game, and you don't have the quicksave button.
 
  • Agree
  • Autistic
  • Like
Reactions: uncleShitHeel, Fork Cartel, BestUserName and 3 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back