- 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: Based on the new FEMA nuclear target map, how screwed are you?
Posted on 2/10/23 at 11:17 am to stout
Posted on 2/10/23 at 11:17 am to stout
quote:
Based on the new FEMA nuclear target map
Nothing new about this map, RedditStout.
This shite was posted on Tigerdroppings in 2014
Image isn't showing up in that thread from 2014 anymore but this was the image when I dug into the url
quote:
This post was edited on 2/10/23 at 11:22 am
2
Posted on 2/10/23 at 11:18 am to The Boat
quote:
don't feel like digging anymore.
Your fallout shelter will never be ready in time.
Posted on 2/10/23 at 11:21 am to stout
They could nuke Beau Rivage. I wouldn't care.
Posted on 2/10/23 at 11:44 am to stout
I live in a posh suburb of South Bend, IN. About 10 miles to the east is Elkhart, IN. Elkhart is home to little more than one of the busiest cross continental train yards in the country.
And for that reason, I am fricked.
And for that reason, I am fricked.
Posted on 2/10/23 at 11:51 am to stout
While a nuke may clean up Jackson what the hell is there worth targeting?
Posted on 2/10/23 at 11:56 am to stout
Only thing I've learned form this is I need lasik
Do they have an interactive map where I can zoom in? This map sucks
Do they have an interactive map where I can zoom in? This map sucks
Posted on 2/10/23 at 12:00 pm to stout
I've lived all my life in locations designated as primary targets until the last couple of years. Got to say, I'd rather go in the quick flash than the aftermath.
Posted on 2/10/23 at 12:04 pm to stout
I'm liking what I see in California, NY, and Chicago.
Posted on 2/10/23 at 12:17 pm to Powerman
quote:
Do they have an interactive map where I can zoom in? This map sucks
Right click on image, then open in new tab, it's downsized for here.
Posted on 2/10/23 at 12:19 pm to RogerTheShrubber
Well looks like that's the place to build a bug out shelter. Not a single target within range.
Posted on 2/10/23 at 12:45 pm to stout
They’d be doing Jackson a HUGE favor.
Posted on 2/10/23 at 1:06 pm to stout
there is a purple triangle on top of my house, literally
Posted on 2/10/23 at 1:26 pm to stout
Joe Biden in his Presidential Bunker deep underground -MY Fruit Cup. Where's my fruit cup. I want my fruit cup.
How screwed am I, you ask? Screwed enough to know that we will, most likely, be vaporized within seconds of a Hydrogen Bomb Blast. Prolly won't even see the mushroom cloud.
So I pray and plead with God to spare us all. You should too. There will be no atheists when (and if) that bomb detonates.
Only God can save us.
How screwed am I, you ask? Screwed enough to know that we will, most likely, be vaporized within seconds of a Hydrogen Bomb Blast. Prolly won't even see the mushroom cloud.
So I pray and plead with God to spare us all. You should too. There will be no atheists when (and if) that bomb detonates.
Only God can save us.
This post was edited on 2/11/23 at 8:56 am
Posted on 2/10/23 at 1:56 pm to The Boat
What are the 4 triangles on the southern border of Texas around Brownsville for? Russia making us a moat instead of a wall?
Posted on 2/10/23 at 1:59 pm to stout
Why the frick would Monroe be a target in a 500 warhead scenario?
Posted on 2/10/23 at 2:34 pm to stout
Yeah.. Jacksonville getting nuked. Mayport / NAS Jax / 30 miles to Kings Bay / Cecil field complex.
Posted on 2/10/23 at 4:46 pm to lostinbr
quote:
Another fun fact I’ve uncovered while researching this map: The 2,000 warhead scenario represents a first strike against the US, while the 500 warhead scenario represents a retaliatory strike under MAD principles.
If you’re going to launch a first strike against the US, your goal is likely to cripple our ability to respond. So you hit places like the ICBM fields up north, military bases, industrial centers, etc.
If you’re launching a retaliatory strike you don’t really care about hitting our ICBM fields as we’ve already launched. You also likely have less warheads available, as presumably our first strike took out a lot of those assets. So you’re launching a reduced number of warheads with the goal of inflicting as much pain as possible - meaning large population centers.
Interesting thanks. I was wondering why our missiles were targeted in the 2000 but not the 500 scenario
Page 10 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News