When do you think the next nuke will be launched? Never? During the late 20th century the world held it's breath, waiting for the end that never came. Will it, /k/? Will it change everything?
>>29531797
Best Korea is probably most likely to do it, theyre stupid enough and dont really have anything to lose, but everything to gain.
And no, it wont change everything. It will be endlessly shitposted and reposted around the world in the media as a total fucking tragedy and disaster blah blah but it too, will pass.
Also, waiting for an Oppenheimer response.
>>29531830
Their target? If their target is also armed, will their be a return do you think?
>>29531846
Not sure who the target is. First instinct is that it will be Worst Korea because lol fuck them, but if their aim is occupation and reunifaction, nuking the territory you want to occupy isnt exactly smart. But then again Best Korea isnt all that bright to begin with.
Or it could be Japan or some unlucky USN Carrier group thats the target, but the latter isnt exactly an easy target to hit in the first place. Especially for Best Korea.
Of course there will be retaliation, im fairly sure a Best Korean nuke will only be used in the slim hope of a crippling first strike or as an oh-fuck when they realise theyre getting their shit pushed in hard in a conventional war.
>>29531895
>im fairly sure a Best Korean nuke will only be used in the slim hope of a crippling first strike or as an oh-fuck when they realise theyre getting their shit pushed in hard in a conventional war.
lol That is exactly what I was thinking. Say they did drop on a UN-member nation.. Would it trigger a nuclear retaliation? Would that in turn trigger another? All nations' allies go ham? WW 'Back to the Stone Age" 3?
>>29531939
Highly unlikely. Nuking Best Korea isnt a good idea if you want to win hearts and minds and all that other gay bullshit that tends to happen these days. Oppenheimer will have more specific details, but they dont have many nukes at all, and even less capability to launch them.
US and Worst Korea would obviously go HAM, and Australia would probably get dragged in as usual with all the arse kissing it does to the US. That and still technically a state of war, since only a ceasefire was signed in 1953 or whenever. As for WW3? Nah, not enough people would want to get their hands dirty in that shitshow.
>>29531993
I be fucking concerned if I live in Japan or Worst Korea and Fat Kim screams death to fishes.
>Best Korea nuclear missile with a CEP of continents.
>>29531993
So, given the current global political climate WW3 is likely unfeasible, and bound to end before it begins? If not, what would cause that level conflict?
>>29531993
>Nuking Best Korea isnt a good idea if you want to win hearts and minds
under current doctrine, it's fairly likely we'd respond to nukes with nukes. Even against the Borks.
As for the OP, in my opinion beyond the Norks we either see small scale battlefield use between the Pakis and Indians, or terrorist nuke. And I mean nuke, not some dirty bomb made with medical isotopes
>>29531830
>Oppenheimer response
I remember Oppenheimer posting in a similar thread. As far as I remember he said the most plausible scenario was US SLBM strike on compromised Pakistani nukes.
>>29532030
More like Circular Error of Hopefully.
>>29532125
That's his opinion
US military won't even confirm they have SF in the area to assume control of loose Paki nukes.
>>29532032
Closest it came recently was with Turkey and Russia stepping on each other's toes in Syria methinks.
South China Sea dispute is looking to be another probable spark.
>>29532080
Yeah, im not too up to date with US nuke policy.
>>29532125
That sounds quite plausible too, dont want those going missing.
a nuke would more likely come from iran, norks are stupid but not that fucking stupid.
but I doubt it would be launched directly at US/NATO forces because of full retaliation.
however, it may not be directly launched at the US/coalition, they will retaliate.
full scale (glass iran)?
doubtful
small scale (breaking their legs and making them walk back home)
probably.
or a terrorist nuke could happen (in 20 years or so, anyway)
but we wouldn't use nukes against them, but it would probably end in desert storm part 2.
>>29531797
Pakistan on India or India on Pakistan desu familia
it will most likely be one of three scenarios...1: a terrorist group steals or makes one and uses it. 2. one is set off by accident in some way that may or may not be seen as a attack. 3. a truly desperate act by someone with no options left.
Maybe when 4th generation pure nuclear weapons are developed.
>>29531797
Either:
1) a terrorist gets a nuke from Pakistan and uses it on a Western nation or Israel
2) or one of the 5 nuclear powers uses nuclear weapons to prevent 1)
3) Best Korea goes apeshit and nukes Japan (it's both close to them and their most hated enemy).
4) or the US uses nuclear weapons to prevent 3)
>>29533777
where can I get that extendo for my wheel gat?
lol
>>29533853
pls post anime girls if you're gonna shitpost
