• Fenrisulfir@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    3 days ago

    Do you mean 100 all at once? Because we’ve been averaging 26.5 per year for the last 80 years

    • DarkAri@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Hmm I don’t think so. If it is true those are over the ocean or something. I mean an attack with 100 missiles would destroy nearly any country. Russia is especially vulnerable because they only have a couple of cities with any population in them. Modern nukes are 50-75x the yield of the ones they dropped on Japan. There are all kinds of externalities. They can poison the ground water for generations. They can kill any life feeding in the area. They can cause fallout which is like a radioactive dust cloud covering everything. It isn’t good.

        • DarkAri@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 hours ago

          You are misunderstanding what I wrote. I’m aware that setting nukes off over the ocean won’t end all life in earth. I never said that tho and you might have me mixed up with someone else. I said that it will end life as we know it and it absolutely will, setting nukes off over cities will cause radioactive fallout, as well as destroy power grids, the internet infrastructure. It will poison the water. You have to also remember that it will short out the hundreds of nuclear power plants potentially leading to meltdowns, unless they are fail safe designs. I don’t think most plants are designed to withstand an emp. Either way a nuclear war would likely mean a reset for human civilization. If you don’t believe this then I’m not going to waste my time trying to convince you otherwise.