VGPolyglot said:
AsGryffynn said:
Doubly or even triply arrogant given that if, in theory, there could be a "winner" in a nuclear war, it would almost certainly be Russia with it's hundreds of underground bunker cities and enough territory to fit in two United States... Then you take into account they have enough to nukes to overwhelm any ABM system through sheer brute force and that they DOUBLE the US in megatonnage and suddenly nuclear war with Russia looks like a "humiliate the US in the most painful and inhumane way possible" contest.
Seriously, why in the world would the US seek to provoke Russia? What do they gain besides free money from Lockheed Martin?
|
There would be no winners at all, the whole world would lose.
|
Technically, you win if your loss is less than the enemy...
SpokenTruth said:
AsGryffynn said:
Doubly or even triply arrogant given that if, in theory, there could be a "winner" in a nuclear war, it would almost certainly be Russia with it's hundreds of underground bunker cities and enough territory to fit in two United States... Then you take into account they have enough to nukes to overwhelm any ABM system through sheer brute force and that they DOUBLE the US in megatonnage and suddenly nuclear war with Russia looks like a "humiliate the US in the most painful and inhumane way possible" contest.
Seriously, why in the world would the US seek to provoke Russia? What do they gain besides free money from Lockheed Martin?
|
80% of their population lives west of the Ural mountains which is an area less than half the size of the US. And we both have enough nukes to render Earth a wasteland. We have 6,800, they have 7,000. Are you not familiar with M.A.D.? Mutually Assured destruction? It's the concept that kept the cold war from becoming a hot war.
|
I am aware of this much. However, Russia's non urban population is spread so thinly that it's been discussed that in the event of Russia starting a nuclear war, there would be enough nukes to reduce the US population to a sub hundred thousand number, but Russia's population would probably remain in the million range, even if only a very small figure...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberia
With three inhabitants per square kilometer, you're only going to have enough to nuke the major cities because the other locations are near non existent as they are. The only place that would fare similarly would be Alaska...
