>I didn't have a good picture.
Suddenly, A world war breaks out. Some of the opposing nations have figure out how to remotely half life the radioactive material in the warheads turning them into useless missiles.
Keep in mind the forests are on fire because theses useless missiles were fired and ran down regardless and started fires that rage on.
>>28283989
... and?
Sooo, what. The fissle material is inert inside the warhead? Or the after-blast radiation is removed quickly? Because one leads to conventional warfare being a thing again, the other leads to a lot of flattened cities
>>28283989
What?
>>28283989
I'd grab my AK and head for somewhere that isn't on fire.
>>28284000
I think he means the fissle material, still it would create a lot of fires.
>>28283989
>GRAB SKS AND GO INNA... FIRE.
>this is fine.imagemacro
>>28283989
>Some of the opposing nations have figure out how to remotely half life the radioactive material in the warheads
>>28283989
Well OP, I'd say it really wouldn't matter what happens in that scenario considering your enemies have somehow figured out how alter the physical properties of elements and now possess the power of remote transmutation.
>>28284038
>>28284032
By blinding posting this scenario, Have i just created the ultimate weapon?
>>28283989
>remotely half life the radioactive material in the warheads turning them into useless missiles.
Nation will make up a fusion bombs.
>>28284038
Well shit, doesn't this mean that they can potentially create a fission/fusion reactor?
Eternally exploding missiles are on the way.
>>28284078
Because you just removed, in theory, a weapon to surpass metal gear, then no. You did not.
