Nuclear target?

[tire]

Ok, first off, this is not to say that Russia is bad in any way, its just, if you have been reading the news as of late, Putin has been kind of threatening the UN.

Main question, are there any strategic targets in Oregon that would be of any use blowing up with a nuclear weapon, as I do not really want to die when the 2 military superpowers start fighting.

 

This is not to say Russian people are bad, I have some Russian friends, they are wonderful, so mods, don't take this post the wrong way

[SorryBella]

13 minutes ago, tire said:

Main question, are there any strategic targets in Oregon

Yes.

[tire]

3 minutes ago, SorryClaire said:

Yes.

dammit, welp, its been a good run, my fate is s e a l e d

[LWM723]

Oh, YES. Your the closest to Russia. Bon Voyage:)

[tire]

1 minute ago, LWM723 said:

Oh, YES. Your the closest to Russia. Bon Voyage:)

little grim, just wanted to know if Russia would nuke a city with over a million civilians, and kill them all, that's a war crime

[LWM723]

Yes they would but highly unlikely as this would be the end of the world if any superpower did this. Retaliation would be immediate.

[Helpful Tech Witch]

*thoughts that violate the political commentary rules*

[WereCatf]

People sure do come up with the weirdest things to worry about.

[tire]

17 minutes ago, HelpfulTechWizard said:

*thoughts that violate the political commentary rules*

Remembers that this is not about politics in the slightest, just global events

[Helpful Tech Witch]

1 minute ago, tire said:

Remembers that this is not about politics in the slightest, just global events

they go hand in hand though....

[it_dont_work]

2 minutes ago, tire said:

Remembers that this is not about politics in the slightest, just global events

The bolstering and parading Putin is doing is mostly about internal politics than any global position. Also diplomacy even if via weapons is still within the political spectrum 

[tire]

16 minutes ago, HelpfulTechWizard said:

they go hand in hand though....

Dammit, not again, it’s just political talk was not what I wanted, I just had a question that needed answers 

[Sarra]

Getting nuked will probably lead to a brighter future for Oregon.

 

<--Is an Oregonner.

[WereCatf]

1 hour ago, tire said:

as I do not really want to die when the 2 military superpowers start fighting.

Literally no one wants a nuclear war, because there's nothing to gain: the moment anyone decides to send a nuke -- even a single one -- everyone else will do that, too, and that'll result in large portions of the world becoming uninhabitable. And, well, what use would large areas of uninhabitable land be to any country?

 

You can't have your citizens move in the contaminated zone, any sort of meaningful industry in the area would be impossible, you'd have to cull wildlife in the area so as for them not to spread any contaminated material around and you'd have a constant drain on resources from having to monitor the area. Not to mention that in a nuclear war, everyone would be targeting industrial zones, so as to cripple the opponent's ability to produce any meaningful resources, so once the war was over, you would be left with a country with lots of people but no industry.

 

There's also the risk of nuclear winter, which would be like shooting yourself in both feet with a shotgun -- and not even a double-barreled one, but a 24-barrel one. Yes, your opponents would be devastated, but so would you in equal measure, and no one would be left to win the war.

[trag1c]

10 minutes ago, WereCatf said:

Literally no one wants a nuclear war, because there's nothing to gain: the moment anyone decides to send a nuke -- even a single one -- everyone else will do that, too, and that'll result in large portions of the world becoming uninhabitable. And, well, what use would large areas of uninhabitable land be to any country?

 

You can't have your citizens move in the contaminated zone, any sort of meaningful industry in the area would be impossible, you'd have to cull wildlife in the area so as for them not to spread any contaminated material around and you'd have a constant drain on resources from having to monitor the area. Not to mention that in a nuclear war, everyone would be targeting industrial zones, so as to cripple the opponent's ability to produce any meaningful resources, so once the war was over, you would be left with a country with lots of people but no industry.

 

There's also the risk of nuclear winter, which would be like shooting yourself in both feet with a shotgun -- and not even a double-barreled one, but a 24-barrel one. Yes, your opponents would be devastated, but so would you in equal measure, and no one would be left to win the war.

Mmmmm Mutually assured destruction...

 

Though I honestly don't think it matters if nukes are fired or not. There's enough fire power on all sides to decimate society with conventional weapons and cyberwarfare. We would be spared the radiological effects but we would be plunged back into the stone age. This is all assuming that this is a legitimate war between between super powers and not the proxy wars that have been fought for decades. 

[LWM723]

If nukes started going off all electronics would be wiped out as well as communications and power grids. It would be like living in the early 1900s for any remaining survivors. If you could live without food and contaminated water.

[Radium_Angel]

Many many years ago, I got my hands on the 1980s designated targets for nuclear strikes by the (then) Soviet Union, against the US. I bought an atlas and started erasing parts of the US, based on the assumption every warhead hit the target.

Many of the targets were no surprise (Norfolk Naval Base for example) and some even came with biological strikes, but a handful of targets were out in BFE (towns with populations that measured in the hundreds) and I always wondered what was there that warranted a nuke...

[IkeaGnome]

3 minutes ago, Radium_Angel said:

Many many years ago, I got my hands on the 1980s designated targets for nuclear strikes by the (then) Soviet Union, against the US. I bought an atlas and started erasing parts of the US, based on the assumption every warhead hit the target.

Many of the targets were no surprise (Norfolk Naval Base for example) and some even came with biological strikes, but a handful of targets were out in BFE (towns with populations that measured in the hundreds) and I always wondered what was there that warranted a nuke...

If any were in Alaska, that's no surprise. Out closest state side bases to Russia are here, NORAD is here, all sorts of RADAR equipment and even the new F35s are up here. 

Tok might have been one that appears small, but is very important.

 

Little known fact, Japan did infact invade the US and hold land for a while in WW2, look up the Battle of Attu. 

[Radium_Angel]

2 minutes ago, IkeaGnome said:

If any were in Alaska, that's no surprise. Out closest state side bases to Russia are here, NORAD is here, all sorts of RADAR equipment and even the new F35s are up here. 

Tok might have been one that appears small, but is very important.

 

Little known fact, Japan did infact invade the US and hold land for a while in WW2, look up the Battle of Attu. 

Yeah Alaska got hit hard (again, 1980s/cold war targets) but the tiny no-nothing towns were mostly along the gulf coast. I assumed some kind of gov't base for research, but I never did find out.

[NekoBubbles]

6 hours ago, Sarra said:

Getting nuked will probably lead to a brighter future for Oregon.

 

<--Is an Oregonner.

So Fallout:Salem? 

[WkdPaul]

8 hours ago, tire said:

 if you have been reading the news as of late

Stop drinking the kool-aid

 

You have about a million other things to worry about other than a nuclear strike. And if there's ever one, there isn't anything you can do against it. There were a few close calls during the cold war, but that's it. We're far from being back into "cold war level" tensions.

[IkeaGnome]

That might have been Cuba related. 

Russia is always pushing out buttons up here.

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2020/10/20/norad-f-22s-intercept-russian-fighters-bombers-near-alaska/

[Sarra]

3 hours ago, NekoBubbles said:

So Fallout:Salem? 

Zombie Army 5: Undead Hippies

[dilpickle]

11 hours ago, tire said:

Ok, first off, this is not to say that Russia is bad in any way, its just, if you have been reading the news as of late, Putin has been kind of threatening the UN.

Main question, are there any strategic targets in Oregon that would be of any use blowing up with a nuclear weapon, as I do not really want to die when the 2 military superpowers start fighting.

 

This is not to say Russian people are bad, I have some Russian friends, they are wonderful, so mods, don't take this post the wrong way

Yes you are doomed.

[dilpickle]

3 hours ago, Radium_Angel said:

Many many years ago, I got my hands on the 1980s designated targets for nuclear strikes by the (then) Soviet Union, against the US. I bought an atlas and started erasing parts of the US, based on the assumption every warhead hit the target.

Many of the targets were no surprise (Norfolk Naval Base for example) and some even came with biological strikes, but a handful of targets were out in BFE (towns with populations that measured in the hundreds) and I always wondered what was there that warranted a nuke...

Nuclear silos were in rural locations. Or it could be infrastructure like oil and gas. There are important sites all over the place that most of us never know about.