- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Nuclear War in South Louisiana
Posted on 3/26/24 at 4:29 pm to Hawgnsincebirth55
Posted on 3/26/24 at 4:29 pm to Hawgnsincebirth55
quote:
What’s the reason for different scenarios? If someone were willing to drop 500 nukes on us why wouldn’t they drop 2,000 if they have them available?
2,000 warhead scenario is a first strike, targeting military installations and defense/industrial infrastructure. That’s why you see so many black dots around ND/MT/WY - trying to destroy our ICBMs.
500 warhead scenario assumes a retaliatory strike where our first strike would have (presumably) taken out a fair amount of their nuclear assets. So they have less missiles overall. And in that scenario it doesn’t make a whole hell of a lot of sense to target ICBM installations if we’ve already launched. So they’re targeted at population centers to maximize casualties instead.
It’s all kind of hypothetical and hinges on key assumptions about how exactly a nuclear war would play out, but it’s basically an illustration of MAD principles.
Posted on 3/26/24 at 4:40 pm to lostinbr
I wonder if these scenarios are why so many sooner/prepper/extreme libertarian types move to Wyoming and Idaho. Appears to be areas in both states that would be low chance of attack in both scenarios
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News