GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   What Countries Would Be Safest In Nuclear War? (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1149653)

just a punk 09-10-2014 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20221906)
no. it's different due to the amount of ash produced and launched into the atmosphere.

Even a very big volcano can not be compared with a global firestorm :2 cents:

just a punk 09-10-2014 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20221916)
The castle bravo detonation, which was only 15 mt, had a much worse radioactive fallout due to not reaching that far into the atmosphere.

Are we talking about the radioactive fallout (as I said already, just add a shell of cobalt and it will do the trick ;)) or about the destruction power? About 15% energy of a ground explosion will turn into a radioactive fallout (a regular nuke w/o a cobalt shell). On the other hand, in case of the high air explosion, there will be no radioactive fallout at all. But once again: it won't be a main problem of the total nuclear war. The global firestorms will finish our civilization. The survivors will envy those who died instantly in the blast area.

Rochard 09-10-2014 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aka123 (Post 20220717)
Well, hundreds of nukes have already been blasted on Earth's surface. Although it have contributed some change in radiation levels, but not that much.

Yes, but only one at a time. You do ten in a three day spread in North America.... And no place in North America would be safe. Ten more in Russia and no place in Russia is safe, not to mention Europe is going to get the radiation. Then factor in Europe will have to be attacked... Japan and Korea because of US troops... Not much left.

What ever is left will feel the fall out. If the radiation doesn't kill what's left, the nuclear winter that follows most likely will.

2MuchMark 09-10-2014 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20221981)
actually you trying to be a smartass by quoting my quotes of people much smarter than you and me put together is what's so fucking funny.

either way, it's sad to think you go through life so guilt-ridden with feelings you caused the end of the world and how you could have fixed it if only a gfyer named dyna mo agreed with you. not to mention all those dead birds you carry the burden of.


Using a fake name while spewing your own misguided beliefs as if they are facts may make you feel good about yourself, but your dismissal of the suffering of animals and the environment they need to live as inconsequential makes you fucking dogshit.

dyna mo 09-10-2014 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ********** (Post 20222028)
Using a fake name while spewing your own misguided beliefs as if they are facts may make you feel good about yourself, but your dismissal of the suffering of animals and the environment they need to live as inconsequential makes you fucking dogshit.


**********, posting while masturbating about michael bay is not a good look for you.

it makes you look desperate.

Let's get serious for a min here, the rest of us are shooting the shit about an arcane topic which really has no consequence and no real answers. We're all enjoying the to&fro and differing views, again about something that there is no real answer. Yet your getting butthurt about it all.

simmer down.

2MuchMark 09-10-2014 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20222040)
**********, posting while masturbating about michael bay is not a good look for you.

it makes you look desperate.

Let's get serious for a min here, the rest of us are shooting the shit about an arcane topic which really has no consequence and no real answers. We're all enjoying the to&fro and differing views, again about something that there is no real answer. Yet your getting butthurt about it all.

simmer down.

Whatever you say, big guy!

dyna mo 09-10-2014 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ********** (Post 20222052)
Whatever you say, big guy!


aka123 09-11-2014 02:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard (Post 20222026)
Yes, but only one at a time. You do ten in a three day spread in North America.... And no place in North America would be safe. Ten more in Russia and no place in Russia is safe, not to mention Europe is going to get the radiation. Then factor in Europe will have to be attacked... Japan and Korea because of US troops... Not much left.

What ever is left will feel the fall out. If the radiation doesn't kill what's left, the nuclear winter that follows most likely will.

I don't know about the one at a time, I think that there have been multiple nukes blasted at the same time. At least for example the Tsar bomba was equivalent of 50-100 common nukes.

Anyhow, no one has said that nuking is safe, but there is a difference between a lot of destruction and death, and between total annihilation. In WWII there died about 73 000 000 people. War is not very safe, with or without nukes. I thought we got that already established.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:37 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123