Did OPpenheimer ever make a map of likely CONUS targets? I'm interested in seeing if there is any possibility of merging that data with wind pattern trackers:
http://hint.fm/wind/
http://earth.nullschool.net/
>>29515673
Look up FEMA Radiation map or FEMA Nuke map you'll get all the data you want on the subject that said my homes good to go
![fallout2[1].gif](https://i.imgur.com/NCgFuVk.gif "fallout2[1].gif")
>>29515690
A search of that brings up a lot of contradicting maps that lack explanation as to why sites are targeted.
>>29515673
Take this map for example. Supposedly a FEMA-data derived map, yet I'm seeing triangle targets that lack any kind of communications hub, military presence(much less a presence that handles strategic assets), or even a sizable population.
Don't even get me started on fallout maps... here's a few.
>>29515833
a lot of those are nuclear missile silos... and small air force and national guard and reserve training centers...
>>29515845
>>29515833
You'll notice that all of these maps supposedly track the same thing, but they're all contradictory again. It's perhaps expected that the discrete detonation sites would be different since apparently we can't keep that shit straight, but the fallout patterns aren't uniform either. And that makes sense, since wind patterns change all the time.
Since the existing maps seem to rely on nothing sustainable for impact locations,
And since wind patterns change all the time,
I think it would make the most sense to condense OPpenheimers targeting criteria with a live updating map to get the most accurate depiction of fallout.
http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/?t=1bcac8b56072b4d24dbc494bd95686a4
This is his
>>29515897
>http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/?t=1bcac8b56072b4d24dbc494bd95686a4
I owe you a beer. Thank you, sir.
>>29515881
>ondense OPpenheimers targeting criteria with a live updating map to get the most accurate depiction of fallout.
Do you know how to do that?
>>29516042
Not at all, but now that I've got the targets in hand, I can take a stab at it. I can tell you that nukemap is very, very simplistic(to the point of near uselessness) when it comes to fallout tracks.
>>29515673
Yes. You need The winds aloft data but you could set that up.
If I'm not mistaken, Alex Wellerstein is setting up the next nukemap update to do just that.
>>29517823
How bad off is florida when the shit hits the fan, I'm asking in the scenario that is most likely to occur in a nuclear engagement
>>29517950
Won't be any worse then before
>>29517823
In case anyone doesn't know, wind aloft data by altitude can be gotten from automated weather stations all across the country. All that's needed is a system which can decode raw METARs and such into sensible data.
>>29517950
Big port, army marine and air force bases nucleur reactors. Gg m8
>>29517950
>scenario that is most likely to occur
That is really the big question.
>>29517995
fkin kek
>>29517950
>>29518129
would the soviets bomb the gulf of mexico and create fuck you tsunami waves?
>>29518150
that's a waste of warheads and not guaranteed.
so no.
>>29518150
Not enough energy in a warhead to do that to good effect.
every map Virginia is fucked
>>29518219
don't worry I live in NM and we're fucked too, since we host the Enduring Stockpile at one of our bases.
which I live less than an hour from.
great.
>>29515816
It's not just about military communications or population
heavy presence of chemical and industrial plants would also indicate a target, also: viable seaports
>>29515710
>>29515816
>>29515833
>>29515845
>>29515881
Haha fuckers, no matter what Oregon is fine. You're all fucked while I'm chillin in the Cascade mountains, working my field, hunting deer, and being alive, unlike all you.
>>29518219
>>29518219
Our sweet home Virginia is host to basically every type of target an enemy would want to hit; CIA HQ, Quantico, major Army bases, Norfolk, major AF bases, not to mention Washington right up north. And apparently out in VA Beach there's a small spot that SEALs are based at.
TL;DR
We're fucked so hard that we'll be shitting through our mouths.
>>29518311
who the fuck in the government decided that it was a good idea to put everything important to keeping america alive in one state.
all an enemy has to do is glass virginia and we are fucked.
>>29518249
who /fuckedineveryscenario/ here?
>>29518311
Looks like just the NE for the most part. Stay away from DC area.
>>29518259
Not enough warheads to hit everything. If it doesn't launch a nuke or tell a nuke to launch, the odds of it being a target are pretty slim.
Exception might be a second strike or retaliatory strike.
>>29518346
>federal government obliterated
>power returns to the states and the people
Sounds like a win to me
>>29518400
Nah b, look up Continuity of Government plans, fat cats all get away
>>29518347
why the fuck is kirtland/monzano mountain not on there?
it's not a secret and i've been to sandia and kirtland, we for sure would be glassed.
besides the fallout from colorado would fuck us anyway.
>>29518431
Oh well. I'm sure the government will be so weakened that any sort of civil war will be relatively easy to win. Things sure as hell aren't going to stay the same after wards.
>>29518478
>country fucked by nuclear strikes
>civil war
pretty sure we'd be too busy trying not to die to worry about a fucking civil war.
besides, every major position has like 8 different backup people all across the country, so the government will still be in power while us residents are fucked
>>29518440
How long do you think it would take to get one of the warheads into operational condition? How threatening would those warheads be given that bombers (and facilities), silos (and facilities), along with boomer facilities would have already been destroyed within about 30 minutes of initial attack?
Fallout: depends on wind aloft and distance. Much of the warheads used will be airburst so little fallout to begin with. Even the ones that will be ground burst likely do not present as great of a fallout threat as you might expect.
Seal your house and stay inside for at least three days. Two weeks if you can.
>>29518608
>How long do you think it would take to get one of the warheads into operational condition
the whole point is to have weapons that can be ready to go in a day or so.
they couldn't destroy ALL of our bombers anyway. even if the weapons arent of concern, it's still a pretty big nuclear control node.
why would the striking warheads be airburst?
they would be mostly hitting military targets so wouldn't ground burst work better to destroy and deny an area?
>>29518683
No. Airburst is the MORE destructive LESS fallout kind of detonation.
This is because the shockwave that hits the ground reflects back into the blast, amplifying it.
As opposed to a ground burst in which the ground absorbed a large portion of the blast, creates a large crater, kicks up more radioactive earth
>>29515816
I can tell you why West Lafayette, IN is targeted. It's the little one off by itself in the Western part of Indiana. Purdue University was considered a "safe" presidential fall back point. Reason being that the greenhouses in the horticulture department can be sealed to keep out fallout, and at the time the entire campus was crisscrossed by a tunnel network. When the Soviets found out about the plans (thanks to the school newspaper spilling the beans) a nuke was pointed at the school, just to be sure.
>>29518683
>go in a day or so
In a war that would likely be over in a few hours.
It could be a target, but it would be low on the list.
>why would the striking warheads be airburst?
It would be a mix. Some targets are hardened, those would require ground burst. Likely multiple targeting. Others are not hardened targets (a building, for example), these would require an airburst.
They would prefer to go with airburst as the CEP is more forgiving.
>>29518865
Unless it has NCA communications it would not be a target.
Considering that the Russians would not tell us what they had targeted, this sounds wholly like an urban legend to me.
>>29519010
Eh, it might be a campus legend. May not, though. Purdue has a pretty big ROTC presence, there's a fully functioning airport on campus, and the tunnel system was super deep and extensive. The university president acknowledged that the Secret Service had scouted the campus out back in the 60's, though.
You're probably right, though, since the Russians are unlikely to have given truthful targeting data.
>>29515710
>>29515816
>>29515833
>>29515845
>Arkadia Ranch in Northern Nevada is ok in every map
Well that's good.
>>29515710
I have a feeling that map no longer holds up after 30 years of growth and decline. The DFW area has become massive and massively important in the last two decades. I would fully expect a nuclear strike on Dallas.
>>29519194
Rotc is irrelevant.
SS will scope out anywhere the President will be speaking.
Urban legend
>>29518249
OPpenheimer omitted albuquerque from the target list because, despite having nukes at kirtland, there's no delivery system for them
>>29518308
>Navel Base
>>29517823
Hey brother, OP here. I know it's late and you may or may not be monitoring, but I have a question about one of the points on the nukemap that you set up. It doesn't seem to make any sense and I'm loathe to blast it in the clear like this. what do?
>>29518385
>less than 5 miles from an army base
fucked to oblivion and back
>Live in Northern California
>Not real targest
>The County over gets BTFO in every scenario
I dont know how I feel about this
>>29521417
Thanks!
>>29521964
Simply state what you don't understand. Someone will explain. There is good reason for all of it.
"I do not understand X, it just doesn't make sense to me. Could you explain why X?"
>>29515816
Welp, Phoenix is turbo-fucked in this map. Gonna turn the valley of the sun into a fucking punch bowl
>>29515816
Lol NORAD literary covered in nukes
>>29515710
Minot, ruining everything for the rest of North Dakota since 1886
>>29515816
>Fargo being hit before Minot AFB
This map a shit
>>29522597
All of those maps are horrible. They are not based on sound strategy, but instead on 'if the Russians just want to kill people because lol'.
They also tend to assume:
1) one target = one nuke
2) and for today, far more warheads than are available
>>29522594
Being near Minot would be a bad thing in nearly any scenario.
>>29522523
Alright, there's a burst in California near Santa Rosa that appears to be centered on a compound of some type. Surrounded by vinyards. I would have figured it to be agricultural works were it not for OPpenheimer(and some of the FEMA maps) saying it needs to die.
What is it?
>>29518272
The us might nuke Portland itself if Oregon is all that remains. Better nothing than that.
>>29518385
Yo.
Best case is build a bunker or just die I guess because Colorado is getting saturated.
>>29522597
Not all targets are military, some are economic and industrial targets. Fargo is North Dakotas main (pretty much only) economic and industrial hub. Trains carrying coal and oil go through there.
On a side note, how many NoDak people want to start a kompound after the happening happens?
>>29523233
Being near minot is a bad idea at literally any time. Floods, nukes, oil worker transients. Just not a good place.
>>29523997
I'm down. Where ya at?
>>29523767
Santa Rosa has civil air patrol and an airport nearby I think. I don't know really.
>New Jersey gets completely annihilated now matter what the scenario
I feel as if I should be concerned.
Also,
>inb4 No guns because NJ
Goddamnit I know. Finding a mk3 no1 is hard enough without the absolute shit tier laws in this state.
>>29523767
There was an error or two in California. In addition, he wasn't super exact with all of the locations. He just put down a blob 'here' and went with it. Consider how large of a project it was for him and that it was something he put together pretty fast.
Here is a bit better cali pic
>>29524308
Is Moffett field not an important target?
>>29524389
Afraid not. Unless it is housing a nuke silo we don't know about. Is there a reason you thought it might be?
>>29515710
>>29515816
I really don't know why Ohio isn't more fucked in these scenario maps. There's a strategic target target in literally every corner of the state. Like Canton,and Cleveland, Toledo, Piketon enrichment plant, Chillicothe, Portsmouth. I'm sure there are more secondary targets but jesus christ, it's pretty spoopy knowing that no matter where i go, i'll end up dying just a few weeks later from radiation poisoning
>>29524581
Other than Wright Pat there really isn't any targets. Nothing that on the timescale of a nuclear conflict that could come in to play.
>>29524308
Weird. In his nukemap layer, all four of those norcal sites are accounted for, but there's still that fifth to the north of SanFran. I tried looking around in Earth to see if there was anything of value, but nothing is popping up. Just to make things more interesting, that same area of Santa Rosa gets hit in some of the FEMA maps posted at the top of the thread, which leads me to suspect that *something* is around there. I just have no clue as to what that could be.
On a scale of Irrevelant to Fallout, how fucked is the Carribbean and Puerto Rico?
>>29524703
Irrelevant.
Where is the Alaska maps? Are they gonna even bother?
>>29524679
FEMA had a complex in that location. It would have had NCA communications. But it had been closed years ago. Simple mistake.
>>29524703
How food independent and economic independent are they? No targets there. But the loss of Uncle CONUS is going to be an issue for secondary effects.
>>29525010
Nobody seems to care about Alaska. However, there are several targets there. Mostly linked to GMD.
>>29524703
Being invaded by Cuba.
>>29518865
Holy shit. More info on this? I'm a Purdue student and this all sounds really interesting.
>>29523975
denver here, we ghouls now
>>29515897
>http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/?t=1bcac8b56072b4d24dbc494bd95686a4
>tfw sitting right in a fallout plume
Beale is pretty obvious I guess but what's in Lincoln and Davis that warrants a couple of warheads?
>>29526943
Lincoln Communication Annex
US Navy Radio Transmit Facility Dixon (map is off a bit)
>>29518308
How come Raven Rock isn't a target but camp david is?
>>29521361
It was a close one, but it could have gone the other way.
>>29523767
It was a communications facility in all likelihood.
Location was approximate.
>>29524581
While there are strategic targets there, the likelihood of them being targeted is less than others.
>>29524679
Yeah closed FEMA facility. It was an error on my part.
>>29526943
Fallout plumes are for illustrative purposes only.
>>29527617
In the initial map, most of the targets in in that region are so close together that it became futile to place them because they were obscured by other blast effects/fallout.
>>29526138
>How food independent and economic independent are they? No targets there. But the loss of Uncle CONUS is going to be an issue for secondary effects.
Hypothesis: in the event of an all-out nuclear exchange including at least some countervalue strikes, the majority of deaths would result from economic dislocation in the aftermath of the strikes, rather than the direct effects of the strikes
what say you, /k/?
>>29528000
Possibly but not certainly.
>>29527833
Thanks Oppenheimer
>>29519384
Yeah this map doesn't make sense. The area WEST of DFW has a higher probability than one of the largest population centers in the country.
And what's west of DFW you ask? Absolutely nothing.
>>29524679
>>29526138
>>29527833
The approximate location coincides with USCG TRACEN Petaluma, which also hosts NAVCEN West. That could be critical enough to warrant a nuke, probably not on a first strike, though.
>>29521417
That's no moon...
>>29527833
Thanks OPpenheimer, you're one of the few good things about /k/
>>29519384
Denton, actually.
>>29529375
Ill look it up and see what I was thinking.
>>29528191
Oppenheimer,
Considering this target map, would you say it would be realistic to say that the estimated actual damage would be less than damage attempted?
I would like to think Russia if they wanted to would launch, have to contend with the UK, France and rest of NATO as well as "shit happens" during warhead's flight to target?
>>29530397
Well, the map is not an attempt to show an actual attack scenario.
Instead, it depicts targets that have a better than even chance at being a target.
Would anybody in Chicago survive? jesus christ....
>>29528191
Depends on the time frame. CV strikes would rack up an impressive body count, no doubt. Let's include radiation related deaths, so you would continue counting for about a month after the exchange.
Thing is, war related famine and epidemics would just start ramping up about the time the direct nuclear casualties are done dying off.
I would hazard a guess that if you stretched the time frame out to 18 months, the economic effects would tally 2 or 3 times the fatalities of the actual exchange.
>>29522581
Gonna turn Cheyenne Mountain into Cheyenne Caldera.
>>29530345
>Ill look it up and see what I was thinking.
Also look under Two Rock Ranch. It might be on a target list for legacy reasons that nobody ever bothered to update.
>>29515816
I know the one in Wisconsin near dodge/fond du lac county is for Oshkosh truck, a huge military contractor, national rivet, a plant in waupun that makes nearly every rivet needed in war time, and a few others in the surrounding 50 miles. I live between the two towns, and 4/10 people work at one of the two I named.
>>29528000
In my opinion, yes. That is the most likely outcome.
>>29529375
>USCG TRACEN Petaluma
I really doubt if a Coast Guard training location would cut the target list.
The original target was for FEMA Federal Regional Center Santa Rosa California or some such. It was this underground re-enforced bunker location. But was closed years ago.
>https://www.flickr.com/photos/coldwararchaeology/sets/72157631886168987/
>>29531459
There are fewer warheads that can be delivered to the US by Russia than there used to be. The number is right around 1600. But I think something like 400 of those are bomber delivered, and have little chance of making the trip (would be used against European or Chinese targets). Of the targets on OP's map, when I added them up, we were looking at about 1000 warheads on the minimum side - that being if only two warheads were used per target.
As you would want to reserve a decent number of warheads for 'do not retaliate, it CAN get worse' deterrence - just in case you failed to hit a few targets...I suspect that they are pretty good about their targeting lists.
>>29519354
I would care if he didn't let the shitheaded kommandos fuck things up for everyone else.
>>29527617
It is. It is the small red dot sort of touching the Camp David marker. Label not shown because it was too close in that pic I guess, Google Earth thing.
Here is a closer-in pic of the DC area.
OP, are there any 'more likely than not' targets missing from this pic?
>>29533609
If OP's map is '60% likely target given tight warhead numbers' then the FEMA maps are '5% likely target given unlimited warhead numbers...Oh, and the Russians really just like killing people for no reason - we know this because our propaganda says so'.
>>29530397
>I would like to think Russia if they wanted to would launch, have to contend with the UK, France and rest of NATO as well as "shit happens" during warhead's flight to target?
That is one reason why a 'full exchange' would not actually be 'every warhead they have hits the US'. And don't forget China from that list of probable conflicts. Regardless of how buddy buddy they are trying to be right now, China is a serious concern for Russia.
In my opinion, when the Russians do something to tweak our noses on the strategic side of things (sending a bomber close to the US, etc). It isn't really the US they are sending a message to, but most often it is China that they are (indirectly) sending a message to. 'If we can mess with the US, we can handle YOU easy'.
>>29530345
>Denton, actually.
?
>>29533944
Oh yes. Lots.
>>29534016
>?
FEMA Region 6 FRC.
>>29517950
> how bad is Florida if shit hits the fan?
> implying it already isn't totally fucked
>>29518400
I'm sorry, but you're retarded. Like, seriously retarded. You also have no understanding of American history at all.
What you think is that this country started off with these noble ideals of democracy, popular rule and representation for all. The reality is that the founding fathers were slave owners (that part doesn't bother me, just for the record) who thought that only landowners should vote. And under the system they set up, even those votes would have been nearly worthless. Yep, the original US of A looked more like a South American junta than a democracy fest.
And goddammit if that wasn't preferable to what we have now.
The moment we decided to let the 3/5ths crowd and women vote, this country took a fucking nosedive. The more people we have voting, the dumber our government gets. People voted for fucking Palin, for fuck's sake. I mean, come on.... there are people who would vote for Sanders. Lots of them. If you let Washington or Franklin see the giant shitshow this country has turned into, they'd surrender to the English rather than put us on the road to this.
Power to the people.... pfft.
>>29515673
>OPpenheimer
Why did they have to dox him?
;_;7
>>29534377
>who thought that only landowners should vote
The idea behind that was for people who have stake in the country to vote.
>>29534404
I don't know.
You know how anti tank shells explode to penetrate?
I have a feeling that even the soviets, not just the russians today or chinese, have a nuke designed to penetrate in the ground.
The only target that could be worth hitting with RPNuke is Yellowstone.
>>29534424
キタ━━━(゜∀゜)━━━!!!!!
お帰り :3
>>29524455
It's a military airfield extremely close to a city of 1 million people. Thought it'd sound like knocking out 2 birds with one stone.
>>29534525
Those things don't make for high priority targets anymore.
>>29518385
>New Jersey
>New York to the north
>Philadelphia to the west
>D.C./Baltimore to the south
>I-95/Route 1 corridor lit up like a Christmas tree
>Joint Base Dix-Macguire-Lakehurst on my doorstep
>mfw nuclear war means New Jerseyans will still be a tanned neon orange.
>>29518129
>>29518308
>>29518347
>>29519010
>>29523233
>>29524308
Where are these maps from
>>29534586
Using peak Russian capability in sheer numbers of birds to today what percentage are still viable for launching warheads accurately/
I'm under the impression that less than 13% of their ICBM arsenal is active compared to back then and they would be relying on sub launches for a second strike.
If this is true all these maps are horribly out dated, right?
>>29535025
The Russians have about 1600 strategic warheads of various types in service.
Which maps are you referring to being outdated?
>>29534404
again? ffs
>>29535722
I think he means that if (and I'm not sure I buy this, especially in the time of Putin) most of Russias strategic arsenal is in a state of disrepair, only a fraction of those warheads are deliverable. If that is true, wouldn't the launch objectives of the SLBMs change at least? Lacking the warheads to do the task means the task must change.
At least, that's what I think he was saying.
>>29535991
>only a fraction of those warheads are deliverable.
I do not think this is accurate.
>>29534416
Exactly.
What the founding fathers wanted, and what we'd have now if they'd gotten their way, is more like a representative feudalism. Or like what England has now, ironically enough. They were very much a bunch of classist snobs who wanted to keep the proles in the fields and the leadership restricted to a tiny minority upper class.
And considering the average voter these days, that might not have been a bad idea
>>29533933
>I really doubt if a Coast Guard training location would cut the target list.
I'm positive it wouldn't. However, NAVCEN is a tenant command. That could possibly be on a 2nd or 3rd strike list. Possibly. They're the interface for all civ non-aviation GPS users, so hitting that would be by way of a counter value strike.
I wasn't aware of the FEMA complex, probably because when I was stationed at Two Rock the FEMA bunkers would have still been active.
>>29535991
If I understood correctly, he was trying to explain why there were so many warheads back then and so many fewer now. Blaming maintenance, etc.
In reality it has to do with treaties and technological advancement in targeting.
I personally suspect that a decent number (maybe 1/5) of Russian warheads that would be launched at the US would either fail to launch, break up during flight, miss, or fail to detonate. But that is a hell of a thing to bet on.
>>29534996
Back when OP first put up his nukemap I asked something like 'wow, could you put that in Google Earth'. He basically responded with 'that would be cool, but this was already a ton of work, let me know how the project goes'.
So, for the next few months I did that. It was hard to pin down exact targets though. Thus whenever I saw him on /k/ I would ask questions like 'hey, see this pic of your nuke map, what targets are those' or I would ask 'in X state what are the targets'. Badgered him pretty good, he probably hates me.
I also did a ton of research on stuff looking for more info on the targets.
I tried to get the map as accurate as possible, X right exactly on the spot.
I'm still struggling with DC.
Anyhow, pics are the result.
>>29533943
Elaborate
>>29535991
Yes, English is not my first language but I do try anon. Thank you
>>29536374
You surely have decent understanding of the cost of maintenance of a nuclear ordanance, where has Russia found the funds all these years. They were in real financial ruin for almost two decades begging America for assistance in controlling their arsenal from theft by their own personal.
My thinking is that it;s very good for America when they rest of the world fears Russian so America perpetuates Russian stagecraft capabilities.
>>29536712
>They were very much a bunch of classist snobs who wanted to keep the proles in the fields and the leadership restricted to a tiny minority upper class.
Speaking as a prole from a long line of proles who descendants will likely be proles THEY WERE RIGHT. Look at what we get when the third generation of life long welfare recipients has the right to vote. A FUCKING SOCIALIST RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT AND DOING JUST GREAT.
Maybe only taxpayers should have the vote. This isn't working anymore and soon we will no longer be a constitutional republic ffs
>>29538064
>So, for the next few months I did that
Well you;re a man among men in a world of men.
I would let you shoot my guns, drink my whiskey and fuck my wife if I knew you.
Thanks anon.
Is there a link where the entire map can be examined.
>>29538238
you mean post more lies and slander.
>>29537963
>I personally suspect that a decent number (maybe 1/5) of Russian warheads that would be launched at the US would either fail to launch, break up during flight, miss, or fail to detonate. But that is a hell of a thing to bet on.
What has led you to this conclusion?
>>29538064
saving all these. stay golden
>>29515710
>New Jersey is fine
Yay.... I guess?
>>29531236
Another thing to consider is that the Russians have a very well developed biological weapons program, and would probably use it in an exchange. Think plague, possibly smallpox (unusually hot strains), and tons of weaponized anthrax.
Oppenheimer, does this seem like a reasonable assessment, or am I over estimating Russian capabilities and ill intent?
>>29537963
>I personally suspect that a decent number (maybe 1/5) of Russian warheads that would be launched at the US would either fail to launch, break up during flight, miss, or fail to detonate. But that is a hell of a thing to bet on.
At one time, 1/3rd (at least) of the US W76 warheads would have failed to detonate.
>>29539410
>Russia found the funds all these years.
That was the priority for defense spending during those periods.
The Russian's have a active test program and it is worth noting that warhead refurbishment rates increased year to year from 1996 to 2006. If they were lacking funds to do this, it would have been difficult to increase the pace of maintenance.
During that time, the strategic forces were the only force getting a steady flow of money.
>>29540272
To your knowledge, has US warhead reliability increased since that point? Are we working to properly maintain our arsenal?
>>29540303
>To your knowledge, has US warhead reliability increased since that point?
Yes. The W76 SELP fixed the issue.
>Are we working to properly maintain our arsenal?
For the most part.
>>29540195
In virtually every single one of Oppenheimer's threads he has stated that nuclear command/launch facilities, in the most loose of terms, are the targets in a nuclear exchange. Furthermore, You don't need to 95P the other guy's cities in order to create the the single greatest catastrophic event in the history of mankind.
>>29540342
Actually let me retract that. Oppenheimer, would a large scale nuclear exchange have a greater impact on humanity than the Black Death?
>>29540390
Almost certainly.
>>29540342
If that was the complete picture, then why have the Russians continued to maintain their biowarfare program? Evidence seems to point towards this being the case, although it is not a certainty. Assuming it is, though, then I can't imagine they would not employ those weapons.
>>29540400
Any thoughts on Russian biowarfare, Oppenheimer? It's something that fascinates me, but I know very little about it in the definitive sense.
>>29540411
Bioweapons would almost certainly not be used during the onset of an attack.
>>29526837
West Colorado here, only thing for me to worry about is the methheads mutating from the small amount of fallout from west of us.
>>29539448
>you mean post more lies and slander.
what?
>>29540342
>In virtually every single one of Oppenheimer's threads he has stated that nuclear command/launch facilities,
He has absolutely no way to know any such thing and the men who do know that kind of information wouldn't post here even if they had a gun to their heads.
Not to dis Oppenheimer. Love the trip, always makes interesting threads and never shitposts.
>>29541268
Why's that?
>>29541268
>He has absolutely no way to know any such thing and the men who do know that kind of information wouldn't post here even if they had a gun to their heads.
Do tell.
>>29541268
What guns would /k/ hold to the heads of the authors of this book, as an example?
>>29541423
Zebra-print DEAGLE brand DEAGLE in .50 AMERICAN EXPRESS
>>29539917
Just ask if you want more.
>>29524581
getting nuked would be an improvement for ohio
>>29540411
>then why have the Russians continued to maintain their biowarfare program?
The issue is reciprocity. You want to be able to retaliate like with like, if you decide to. It helps to deter attack. If you instead say 'I will only use X, no matter what weapon you use' then you get into trouble if X for some reason can't be used. The real problem occurs if the other side THINKS that X can't be used, when in fact you would be willing.
>>29539868
For one, OP stated in one thread that it was something like .85 dependable or some such. But I also considered reports about the status of maintenance on various silo's just after the cold war. There are also reports about shortcuts being taken with qualifying missiles for the Russians. For example, their new sub missile was supposed to have several 'success' launches in a row before they said 'yeah, we deploy this thing'. But there were a bunch of fails in a row, when they finally got a success Putin said 'that is good, go with it' and off thus it was certified.
The issue was quality control in construction. Something the Russians haven't been known for, and something that is hard to pin down if you have a systemic problem. Which I think the Russians do. 1/5 may be generous.
Thing is, that isn't really a good thing. That could make some US president in the future do something rash or make a Russian leader over react depending on how many and what version of double thinking you want to do.
When one side thinks the other guy believes they are vulnerable (if they are or not) things can get shaky. It is a little like the concept of their being a tipping point that when your number of deliverable warheads drops below a certain point you actually introduce instability.
But anyhow, that is how I got there. Call it 1/5 for no other reason than just because. There is no 'fact' behind it though.
>>29518346
muh centralization.
Whatever happened to Federalism, anyways?
>>29542311
>The issue was quality control in construction.
Russian rockets have in general been pretty good.
>>29540195
There is no delivery mechanism for 99% of the global plague shit. Russia's interest in them is based on medical treatment through beneficial viruses, opposite to the west which went with antibiotics.
You can't hand Vasily a level 4 agent for use in the field. It doesn't work that way.
The chems that they have will have similar effects to what happened in WW1 and that's if they can be delivered.
>>29515710
How the hell is VA/MD yellow? There's like a billion military installations and govt. contractors located in both. Same goes for CA, both coasts shouldn't even be on the map because they'll have melted into the ocean.
>>29545159
The probable reason is that when that map was produced, it was thought that the strikes in that area would be air bursts.
>>29515816
You should see the UK's square leg target prediction
>Russia will nuke random rural areas and boring small towns, but ignore fucking Whitehall, the centre of UK government.
>>29544971
All I could do was open resource research of course. From what I saw the issue was stated as being quality control of parts.
How the author(s) would know or not know would depend on their research and I of course have no way to fact check that.
>>29515673
if you detonate high enough in the air there is no mushroom ?
>>29545332
you need a government to survive so that negotiations can take place.
>>29541811
>Dirigible
>Positive Features: Minimal environmental impact
Topkek, never mind the nuclear missile...
>>29545159
Most of those would not be targets in any scenario.
The one presented in the map you are referencing foresees only missile silo (and direct support) being targeted. They would be hit with a ton of ground burst weapons.
As far as I could tell the higher rad areas corresponded to Atlas missile sites and their control/support locations. Thing is, Atlas was (I think) retired long before that pic is labeled.
Those bases saw a lot of use though. There were some Titan missiles in those (vague) locations and a few minuteman in some others. So who knows.
Pic is labeled with what it looked like they corresponded to with a quick look.
I got to take off, so this is the best I can do with the time I got.
But the take away is, it seems to want to show fallout from missile silo (and direct support) strikes only. It does not appear to model in governmental C&C or any other type of strike.
>>29545558
In all likelihood the people who would make such negotiations wouldn't be anywhere near Whitehall if the bomb was set to drop (because London itself is still a target and hanging around because they might not to drop a bomb directly in your garden is a bad idea.)
But those left behind would be a valuable target.
(Furthermore in a cold-war-gone-hot scenario, I don't find it too unreasonable to assume the USA would end up negotiating on the part of the British anyway, unless the Soviets are interested in asking for a separate peace with the UK, but assuming the Soviets would assume such a thing (that you assumed they'd assume you'd assume...) would be quite odd.)
has anyone done studies on how close an airplane can safely be to a nuclear blast?
>>29518272
>no nuclear war
>fallout from fukushima going on 5 years now
good luck with all that
>>29545332
>ignore fucking Whitehall, the centre of UK government
a 3 or 4 big warheads would absolutely starch everything inside the M25 anyway, no need for one specifically on Whitehall
>>29545650
>But those left behind would be a valuable target.
Not if they have relocated to other areas.
Square Leg was testing a scenario where the Soviets desired an intact UK command and control system, but also wanted to degrade its effectiveness during the exchange to limit retaliation.
>>29545998
>degrade its effectiveness during the exchange to limit retaliation.
Surely that makes no sense if the Submarines are already out at sea with letters of last resort? The scariest thing on the UK mainland being the F-111, and not even theirs at that.
(Unless we're talking "Take that, and if you don't order your submarines not to retaliate then we'll ensure not a single Briton remains alive.", i.e. possibly leaving a tenuous dr. strangelove scenario where everyone wants to stop britain's trident submarines, but britain's ability to communicate is dubious and the submarine isn't going to listen to ivan ivanovich saying "no seriously, the uk has given up you guys.")
Recalling that Square Leg is the UK assuming what the Soviets would do instead of what the soviets would actually do makes it all seem very odd. (Again because of stacking presumptions about what he'll assume you'll assume he'll assume you'll assume.)
>>29546202
The letters of last resort are just that.
During a nuclear exchange, the UK would want to issue orders to her submarines consistent with their role in the attack option(s) that the US (and thus NATO) have chosen to execute.
If the UK can not issue prompt orders to their subs, then this diminishes the overall effectiveness of the NATO/US response.
>>29546307
Is there anywhere that the full Square Leg plans are detailed?
I'm curious now as to whether they imagined an entire war scenario, or just went "fuck it, America will bark orders at us and we need to be ready to respond"
>>29545621
Environmental impact on the US. The chosen plan for the MX ultimately died because of opposition to digging up so much of Nevada and Utah.
