Ukraine the bad guy?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Gideon300

Well-known member
Mar 18, 2021
5,003
2,919
113
https://nypost.com/2018/06/15/it-would-only-take-100-nuclear-weapons-to-destroy-society/

This is how many nukes it would take to destroy society
By James Rogers, Fox News

June 15, 2018 | 11:02am

New research argues that 100 nuclear weapons is the “pragmatic limit” for any country to have in its arsenal. Any aggressor nation unleashing more than 100 nuclear weapons could ultimately devastate its own society, scientists warn.

The study was published in the journal Safety on Thursday; it was co-authored by Michigan Technological University professor Joshua Pearce and David Denkenberger, assistant professor at Tennessee State University and director of Alliance to Feed the Earth in Disasters.

“The results found that 100 nuclear warheads is adequate for nuclear deterrence in the worst case scenario, while using more than 100 nuclear weapons by any aggressor nation (including the best positioned strategically to handle the unintended consequences) even with optimistic assumptions (including no retaliation) would cause unacceptable damage to their own society,” the scientists wrote.

There are approximately 15,000 nuclear weapons globally, according to the research, with the US and Russia accounting for nearly 90 percent of that total. With nine nuclear weaponized countries, the paper argues for a disarmament proposal that would reduce the number of nuclear weapons in the world to 900 or less.

“100 nuclear warheads is the pragmatic limit and use of government funds to maintain more than 100 nuclear weapons does not appear to be rational,” the paper argues.

The scientists discuss the devastating global environmental impact that would occur when a country deploys more than 100 nuclear weapons.

This “environmental blowback” would involve a significant drop in global temperatures as soot from nuclear blasts prevents sunlight from reaching Earth’s surface. This, combined with reduced precipitation, could severely impact food production, experts warn, potentially resulting in mass starvation.

“If the agricultural productivity reverts to preindustrial yields because of a nuclear strike, most countries would not be able to feed themselves,” the study says.

Researchers also cite conservative estimates that 34 million people would die if 100 nuclear bombs were unleashed on China, the world’s most populous nation.FILED UNDER DOOMSDAY , NUCLEAR WEAPONS , 6/15/18
No one in their right mind wants to find out in reality, but the risk of radio active contamination is probably overstated. Nuclear weapons are most effective from air bursts well above the target. This maximises destruction and minimises radiation. Serious radiation is produced by irradiated debris. Much more is produced if the ground itself is struck. Radio active soil will be sent high into the atmosphere and spread wherever the winds take it.

This is why some countries have a massive arsenal. First of all, it is to deter other countries from starting a nuclear war. So far, so good on that front. Second, the blast radius from nuclear weapons varies considerably depending on the size. Some weapons can destroy a city while others are tactical rather than strategic.

34 million people is barely a dent in the population of China. The problems will come afterwards, when infrastructure is destroyed and there is no government to maintain control. China has 155 cities with a population over 1 million. If someone was to attack China, they would have to overwhelm every defence, every military base and every counterstrike force. This is near impossible as China has nuclear armed submarines.

The scenario I see more likely is Iran gaining nuclear weapons and using them on Israel. Possibly nuclear war will break out between India and Pakistan if Islamists get control of Pakistan. Imagine bin Laden with nukes. Actually, I'd rather not..........

I believe that nuclear war will happen at some time. I'm 72, so I hope not to see it. The Bible seems to foretell nuclear war.
 

Fundaamental

Well-known member
Mar 17, 2023
3,289
421
83
You are in charge, King Charles gets his power from the Welsh
king Charles in charge of the Welsh oh boy.

I would run for cover for that one.


A lot of people like them and I actualy like prince harry

The good thing about the royal family is they do attract tourism which is good for thé economy

So they do actually make the country more money than they actually cost the UK.
 

ZNP

Well-known member
Sep 14, 2020
32,989
5,782
113
I believe that nuclear war will happen at some time. I'm 72, so I hope not to see it. The Bible seems to foretell nuclear war.
I think it is pretty hard to explain certain Bible verses without nuclear war.

No flesh would survive? A third of the people on earth are killed? A fourth of the people on earth are killed? Ezekiel 38 and 39 seems to describe Israel dealing with radioactive waste and material.

Also, without nuclear war how could a great empire referred to as "the great Babylon" be destroyed in a single hour? How could any great empire on Earth today be destroyed in a single hour without nukes?

Then the millennial kingdom is called "the restoration of all things". That sounds like you are cleaning up from pollution, how long would it take to clean up nuclear waste and pollution from nuclear power plants, etc.?

There are more verses, more examples, but this should make it clear that "seems to foretell" is probably much closer to "all but says plainly".
 

ZNP

Well-known member
Sep 14, 2020
32,989
5,782
113
king Charles in charge of the Welsh oh boy.

I would run for cover for that one.


A lot of people like them and I actualy like prince harry

The good thing about the royal family is they do attract tourism which is good for thé economy

So they do actually make the country more money than they actually cost the UK.
No, I said King Charles gets his power from the Welsh, they were the ones who conferred the prince of Wales with power, look at his heraldic achievement it clearly states "I the Black Prince Serve the Red Dragon" and the red dragon is the symbol of Wales.

Prince Charles went to Wales for a few months to learn welsh before becoming Prince. In that process he learned a lot about what the people thought and that strongly influenced his speech. He used that same lesson to ingratiate himself with the Moslems, and with the Climate activists, with the ecumenical movement, and with others.
 

Fundaamental

Well-known member
Mar 17, 2023
3,289
421
83
No one in their right mind wants to find out in reality, but the risk of radio active contamination is probably overstated. Nuclear weapons are most effective from air bursts well above the target. This maximises destruction and minimises radiation. Serious radiation is produced by irradiated debris. Much more is produced if the ground itself is struck. Radio active soil will be sent high into the atmosphere and spread wherever the winds take it.

This is why some countries have a massive arsenal. First of all, it is to deter other countries from starting a nuclear war. So far, so good on that front. Second, the blast radius from nuclear weapons varies considerably depending on the size. Some weapons can destroy a city while others are tactical rather than strategic.

34 million people is barely a dent in the population of China. The problems will come afterwards, when infrastructure is destroyed and there is no government to maintain control. China has 155 cities with a population over 1 million. If someone was to attack China, they would have to overwhelm every defence, every military base and every counterstrike force. This is near impossible as China has nuclear armed submarines.

The scenario I see more likely is Iran gaining nuclear weapons and using them on Israel. Possibly nuclear war will break out between India and Pakistan if Islamists get control of Pakistan. Imagine bin Laden with nukes. Actually, I'd rather not..........

I believe that nuclear war will happen at some time. I'm 72, so I hope not to see it. The Bible seems to foretell nuclear war.
yeah i wondered about that.

I wondered if the fact the nuclear bomb that was dropped high up from a plane, would it cause less impact if it was fired as a missile


But they weight of those missiles is ten tons at least.

I remembered briefly that the nuke that hit Hiroshima's may not have hit the ground befor detonation.

I think it would be crazy to use them that way.

Maybe they never would.

Sounds suicidal if the fall out would be that bad.

But I do find it hard to believe that 100 nukes could only kill 34 Millon on initial impact but destroy all of society afterwards all around the world.

I'm not sure it's a bluff.
 

Fundaamental

Well-known member
Mar 17, 2023
3,289
421
83
No, I said King Charles gets his power from the Welsh, they were the ones who conferred the prince of Wales with power, look at his heraldic achievement it clearly states "I the Black Prince Serve the Red Dragon" and the red dragon is the symbol of Wales.

Prince Charles went to Wales for a few months to learn welsh before becoming Prince. In that process he learned a lot about what the people thought and that strongly influenced his speech. He used that same lesson to ingratiate himself with the Moslems, and with the Climate activists, with the ecumenical movement, and with others.
lol his monarchy just still has power over Wales that's all.

His real commitment is to be a defender of the faith and sovereign leader over the church of England. Amongst other roles.
 

ZNP

Well-known member
Sep 14, 2020
32,989
5,782
113
lol his monarchy just still has power over Wales that's all.

His real commitment is to be a defender of the faith and sovereign leader over the church of England. Amongst other roles.
He rules over a third of the Earth.
 

ZNP

Well-known member
Sep 14, 2020
32,989
5,782
113
yeah i wondered about that.

I wondered if the fact the nuclear bomb that was dropped high up from a plane, would it cause less impact if it was fired as a missile


But they weight of those missiles is ten tons at least.

I remembered briefly that the nuke that hit Hiroshima's may not have hit the ground befor detonation.

I think it would be crazy to use them that way.

Maybe they never would.

Sounds suicidal if the fall out would be that bad.

But I do find it hard to believe that 100 nukes could only kill 34 Millon on initial impact but destroy all of society afterwards all around the world.

I'm not sure it's a bluff.
If you dropped 1 strategic nuclear bomb on Manhattan about 1,500,000 people would be killed and 3 million more injured. All of NYC and Newark would be damaged from the blast. All bridges out of the city would be in the blast zone except for Throgs neck which would just barely be on the edge of the zone. This would make it nearly impossible to leave if you live in Long Island.

This is from an 800 kiloton bomb which this website says Russia has in thier arsenal.

https://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/

However, there are 20 million people who live in this area, they work in NYC, not any longer, they live or eat in the area, not any longer. They will not be able to drive out of the city, the EMP blast from an airburst of a nuclear bomb would have fried any and all things electric. No phones, no cars, no electricity, no computers. The port will be completely wiped out. Grand Central Station and all trains and buses will be wiped out. Also no refrigeration so any food in the freezer or refrigerator will be gone after a few days. No lights, no water, no toilets, no garbage pick up, after everything is looted no food, no heating in winter and no hospitals.

I suppose you could ride a bicycle to escape, but that means doing extreme aerobic exercise on the edge of the blast zone from a nuclear bomb. Hard to believe you would not wind up with radioactive dust deep inside your lungs.

If people can't leave the city or the island then you can be sure no one is going to truck anything in.
 

Fundaamental

Well-known member
Mar 17, 2023
3,289
421
83
If you dropped 1 strategic nuclear bomb on Manhattan about 1,500,000 people would be killed and 3 million more injured. All of NYC and Newark would be damaged from the blast. All bridges out of the city would be in the blast zone except for Throgs neck which would just barely be on the edge of the zone. This would make it nearly impossible to leave if you live in Long Island.

This is from an 800 kiloton bomb which this website says Russia has in thier arsenal.

https://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/

However, there are 20 million people who live in this area, they work in NYC, not any longer, they live or eat in the area, not any longer. They will not be able to drive out of the city, the EMP blast from an airburst of a nuclear bomb would have fried any and all things electric. No phones, no cars, no electricity, no computers. The port will be completely wiped out. Grand Central Station and all trains and buses will be wiped out. Also no refrigeration so any food in the freezer or refrigerator will be gone after a few days. No lights, no water, no toilets, no garbage pick up, after everything is looted no food, no heating in winter and no hospitals.

I suppose you could ride a bicycle to escape, but that means doing extreme aerobic exercise on the edge of the blast zone from a nuclear bomb. Hard to believe you would not wind up with radioactive dust deep inside your lungs.

If people can't leave the city or the island then you can be sure no one is going to truck anything in.
an 800 ton bomb wow.

That's got to be a bluff that one.

I read there all ten ton at most

How would you even maintain a nuke that big, let alone carry it in a plane or fly it over long distance

Your talking one huge rocket there.

It would have to be some huge missile loader on a huge cargo ship carting that.

To risky on a sub I would imagine or a plane.

I'm sure the yanks would shoot that one out of the sky.
 

ZNP

Well-known member
Sep 14, 2020
32,989
5,782
113
I don't suppose they would have to many of those
The yanks don't have too many cities the size of NY either.

The Satan II missile of the Russians can carry 10 heavy MIRV missiles of 1.2 MT each.

Casualties from just one warhead hitting NYC would be 1.8 million dead and 3.3 million injured. When you consider the chaos after such an explosion I suspect many of those injured would wind up dying as well as all those that would die due to the electricity going out.
 

ZNP

Well-known member
Sep 14, 2020
32,989
5,782
113
The yanks don't have too many cities the size of NY either.

The Satan II missile of the Russians can carry 10 heavy MIRV missiles of 1.2 MT each.

Casualties from just one warhead hitting NYC would be 1.8 million dead and 3.3 million injured. When you consider the chaos after such an explosion I suspect many of those injured would wind up dying as well as all those that would die due to the electricity going out.
Also that 1.2 MT bomb would impact every bridge into and out of NYC possibly cutting off all of Long Island to anything other than boats.
 

Fundaamental

Well-known member
Mar 17, 2023
3,289
421
83
I'm not sure this source is reliable friend,

The risks around maintaining a nuke that big are huge.

But who knows really, we are talking classified here,

This sounds like one of those alien website sources.
 

ZNP

Well-known member
Sep 14, 2020
32,989
5,782
113
I'm not sure this source is reliable friend,

The risks around maintaining a nuke that big are huge.

But who knows really, we are talking classified here,

This sounds like one of those alien website sources.
Perhaps, I see NY Post, CBS, Business Insider, Daily Mail, The Independent, and Al Jazeera, Popular Mechanics, Washington Post, and Reuters all reporting on the RS-28 Sarmat
 

cv5

Well-known member
Nov 20, 2018
19,129
7,411
113
The yanks don't have too many cities the size of NY either.

The Satan II missile of the Russians can carry 10 heavy MIRV missiles of 1.2 MT each.

Casualties from just one warhead hitting NYC would be 1.8 million dead and 3.3 million injured. When you consider the chaos after such an explosion I suspect many of those injured would wind up dying as well as all those that would die due to the electricity going out.
The MIRV cluster bomb "shotgun effect" creates zones of pressure wave amplification that is exceedingly devastating.
One full MIRVed strike and all of NYC and surrounding suburbs are wiped off the map with near 100% casualties.

Furthermore, one of the greatest casualty effects is.......complete blindness. Even at long ranges many KM away. The "head snap" to see the flash is instinctive and will result in irreversible blindness.
 

cv5

Well-known member
Nov 20, 2018
19,129
7,411
113
The yanks don't have too many cities the size of NY either.

The Satan II missile of the Russians can carry 10 heavy MIRV missiles of 1.2 MT each.

Casualties from just one warhead hitting NYC would be 1.8 million dead and 3.3 million injured. When you consider the chaos after such an explosion I suspect many of those injured would wind up dying as well as all those that would die due to the electricity going out.
There are perhaps a dozen very large cities in the US. And all would suffer total annihilation by one fully MIRVed strike.
One day you have a functioning nation, the next day you have irreducible devastation. Any other strikes would "only make the rubble bounce".

Do you see most people around the world desperately clinging onto the Savior (like Jacob the "heel-holder") with full knowledge that this is the only escape from this inevitable fate? Not so you would notice.

Nevertheless, the just shall live by faith.
 

ZNP

Well-known member
Sep 14, 2020
32,989
5,782
113
There are perhaps a dozen very large cities in the US. And all would suffer total annihilation by one fully MIRVed strike.
One day you have a functioning nation, the next day you have irreducible devastation. Any other strikes would "only make the rubble bounce".

Do you see most people around the world desperately clinging onto the Savior (like Jacob the "heel-holder") with full knowledge that this is the only escape from this inevitable fate? Not so you would notice.

Nevertheless, the just shall live by faith.
Americans think we might be able to defend against a missile strike, but I suspect we will be hit by the tsunamis first causing mayhem to where 65% of Americans live and taking down the nations electric grid. You can't stop those Tsunamis from the poseidon torpedos and the damage to the coastline and to the electric grid would push the entire country into chaos and very likely result in a much greater percentage of missiles hitting the targets.