> ever one would die right

POO
IN
LOO

you think their nukes would work? they don't even have flushable toilets

>>55784872
Their warheads aren't at that level, nor do they have enough to wipe out all of mankind.
Do some research before you start spouting random shit

>>55785053
The fallout from 10-20 poo in loo nukes would still fuck up half the planet just from the radiation

>>55785096
no it wouldn't. we used to set the things off all the time.

>>55785096
Lol no. Do you know how many nukes we've tested? It's in the many hundreds.

>>55785823
You are talking about 50s-60's era nukes when everything else has been set off under ground and under yield, even the tsar bomba has only been tested at half yield because the plane that set it off would not have been able to escape the blast radius and they were afraid it might set the atmosphere on fire

>>55785096
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLCF7vPanrY

>>55785977
Like I said most modern ones have been set off underground and under way less than maximum yield

>>55785096
Tzar Bomba makes poo in loo nukes look like fireworks.

The ebin nuclear winter meme. Stick to Fallout 4 for your unrealistic scenarios.

>>55786267
Which was launched decades ago, you don't think that tech has leaked to poo in loo tier countries yet?

>>55786282
Some say the current russian nuclear torpedo could not only cause a tsunami that would reach 1500km inland off of a coast but would cause nuclear winter for hundreds of years

>>55786473
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pokhran-II#Nuclear_yields_and_prediction

Their nukes are shit tier compared to stuff the Soviets did. They last tested in them in 1998.

At best they are 60 kilotons but probably not even that much.

Tzar Bomba was 50000 kilotons

>>55784872
Actually it is completely a cultural and environmental/social argument that nuclear war shouldn't happen there.
The cultural argument being too much irreplaceable history would be destroyed in such a conflict.
The social environmental argument is the ecosystems already on their knees simply could not handle the physical disruption caused by nuclear war and wouldn't recover.

Millions maybe a billion lives could be lost and a region with the highest birth defects in the world would climb higher.

It's simply cruel to have a nuclear war there, the world on a whole would be relatively fine however and may even be better off due to particulate matter cooling the atmosphere and slowing global warming

>>55787147
What about fallout from modern nukes? I don't think the world would be fine

>>55787312
Why don't you want to fight climate change you selfish cunt? You like little Polynesian countries being sunk by global warming do ya? DO YA?

>>55787361
I like clouds yes but deadly radiation no

Nuclear winter would ruin crops across Asia. We'd most likely be fine in western countries.

good i want off this ride tbqh family ;_;