Quote:
Originally Posted by CyberSEO
Drive? They are already there (e.g. Иркутск)
You are too overestimate the danger of radioactive contamination. The modern nukes use the power of chain reaction very effective. It almost fully converts into a blast wave, heat, light and rigid radioactivity. So the contamination is minimal. E.g. one Chernobyl was worse than 1000 blasts of strategic nukes. Not by destruction (it was just a steam-gas explosion), but by the radioactive contamination. If you want, I can explain the Chernobyl case more detailed.
Both our countries made a countless test nuclear blasts on their own territories and, as you may note, you and me are still alive  E.g.: |
you've got better weapons that are actually designed and in place. but, sure, there's no law against your launching a topol from siberia to ukraine, but, your government has weapons actually designed for that purpose,
the fallout map predictions are realistic and based on current nuclear tech and it show all fallout moving towards russia from any nuclear detonation in Europe, due to prevailing winds. 100s of square miles of radioactive fallout, and you and I both know since the cloud of an 800kt nuke doesn't reach high enough altitude for the radioactive debris to decay before it falls back to earth, so an 800kt debris cloud is potentially more deadly than say, the tzar bomb fallout.
so if you and the other guy want to think it makes sense to use topols in close range nuclar strikes, and disagree that the nuclear fallout is of no importance to russians, who am I to argue.