• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

A discussion about nuclear weapons and what the future may hold?

Status
Not open for further replies.

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
9,218
Location
SE London
So are Germany, Canada, Spain, Italy, Poland and everyone else in NATO except us and the French a vassal of the US then? Truly only the French have an independent nuclear deterrent, our Tridents are in a shared pool with the US Atlantic fleet.

NATO provides that MAD deterrent to every member regardless of their actual nuclear status.

I would think there's a good argument that having the three NATO countries with a nuclear deterrent is a lot better than just one country having it. If - say - the US was the only NATO country with nuclear weapons, then an aggressor might reason that it's worth the risk of snapping up some minor country like Latvia, taking the gamble that , despite what Article 5 says, US won't be sufficiently interested/willing to escalate to use them. If the US, the UK AND France all have them, then that would be a much greater risk for the aggressor - they'd be gambling that THREE NATO countries would all refuse to escalate. Hence a greater deterrent effect.

Different countries specialising in different things would provide a good reason why you might not want EVERY NATO country to be spending billions on nuclear weapons (aside from the need to avoid nuclear proliferation)
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

GS250

Member
Joined
18 Mar 2019
Messages
1,031
I believe China's Philosophy has something to do with believing that their sheer population level will see them through. They accept that a nuclear strike will devastate a large amount of their military and would almost certainly wipe out tens of millions of their population courtesy attacks on the cities. However, they will then fire back using their stored weapons.

Still not convinced an all out nuclear war is ever going to be survivable to mankind. Even a few hundred warhead detonations over one large country could result in an Worldwide climate and health catastrophe.
 

RichJF

Established Member
Joined
2 Nov 2012
Messages
1,202
Location
South London
The reason Putin has envoked so much fear by mentioning the warfare 'N' word is because we've become accustomed to televised conventional war and relative "stability" through the 1990s -2010s. A large proportion of the world's population alive today did not live through the period of MAD or having to watch PSA films advising you what to do in the event of a nuclear strike.
 

GS250

Member
Joined
18 Mar 2019
Messages
1,031
The reason Putin has envoked so much fear by mentioning the warfare 'N' word is because we've become accustomed to televised conventional war and relative "stability" through the 1990s -2010s. A large proportion of the world's population alive today did not live through the period of MAD or having to watch PSA films advising you what to do in the event of a nuclear strike.

Those PSA films were about as reassuring as sending in Liz Truss to negotiate with Russia. My dad, in typical style told me as a 12 year old...."son, if the bomb goes off, you want to be right underneath it. Either that or spend the next few years trying to live off of a Rat's milk"
 

Paul Jones 88

Member
Joined
15 Dec 2020
Messages
446
Location
Headcorn
If nuclear war breaks out, I shall be sitting on a bench in the middle of London drinking a bottle of good single malt.
 

McRhu

Member
Joined
14 Oct 2015
Messages
667
Location
Lanark
There are weapons and there are weapons. God willing we never see the accursed things used though. FWIW the tendency has been to reduce the "yield" as accuracy has increased: they don't need to be as destructive to ensure they get their target. Thus warheads tend to be in the multi-kiloton range rather than the multi-megaton, although this can be 'dialled' in as required in certain weapons. Small comfort though. They work by releasing the binding energy from large atoms (of the fissile material of choice) as each heavy atom is split into two lighter atoms. The fallout derives from the fissile material that is not 'exploded' but simply vapourised and dispersed by the explosion. The actual amount of energy released is roughly equivalent (E=MC2) to that contained in a 1 penny piece. At heart they are primitive and horrible things. Demystifying them helps a bit, but as I say, God willing the day will come when they are scrapped and forgotten. Meantime, let's not give too much heed to them and get on with our lives. Enjoy every good thing we've been blessed with, appreciate even the mundane things and look forward to better times.
 

McRhu

Member
Joined
14 Oct 2015
Messages
667
Location
Lanark
I can see a very lucrative (if short lived) opportunity for a pop-up bar there.
 

Wynd

Member
Joined
20 Oct 2020
Messages
741
Location
Aberdeenshire
If nuclear war breaks out, I shall be sitting on a bench in the middle of London drinking a bottle of good single malt.

A wise move. If it comes to that, that's about all any of us will have time for.

It would be a very short war indeed, with few left to write the history books once it had passed.

To add melancholy, whats the preference? Be in a large city,(London and Glasgow being the obvious 2) quick and painless, or flee to high ground and see out the last week or 2 with acute radiation poisoning?
 

GS250

Member
Joined
18 Mar 2019
Messages
1,031
A wise move. If it comes to that, that's about all any of us will have time for.

It would be a very short war indeed, with few left to write the history books once it had passed.

To add melancholy, whats the preference? Be in a large city,(London and Glasgow being the obvious 2) quick and painless, or flee to high ground and see out the last week or 2 with acute radiation poisoning?

Isle of Skye apparently a great place to survive the initial effects. In fact you would possibly get a fair crack at it there if the Westerly winds prevailed. However...the (non) eco system would be your demise.

Ground zero an even better place of course. However, there were 100s of survivors in very close proximity to ground zero in Hiroshima. A deep level tube station in London would protect you from an air burst....but again...what do you come out to?
 

Strathclyder

Established Member
Joined
12 Jun 2013
Messages
3,846
Location
Clydebank
Ground Zero for me. Should it ever come down to it, it's far better to be vapourized instantly than to take the slow and agonizing route of radiation poisoning. Not quite the same thing I know, but the fate of a good majority of the first emergency responders to the Chernobyl disaster (dying slowly of acute radiation syndrome or ARS) just solidified that for me.
 

westv

Established Member
Joined
29 Mar 2013
Messages
4,411
If Nuclear war did break out can we still rely on RailUK forums for discussions about the colour of train tickets?
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
31,129
Location
Redcar
My concern lately has been that the Russian don't have enough weapons left to do the job properly. Back in the Cold War days the Soviet Union had more than enough to ensure that most of us would be killed outright or would die rapidly afterwards of radiation, injuries or similar (think Threads). These days whilst the Russians have more than enough weapons to blast us back to the stone age I worry that my chance of not being killed either outright or rapidly has diminished and I might actually be cursed enough to survive for a few weeks or months before finally succumbing to starvation, disease or similar.

Not that I think it's particularly likely though.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
32,949
Location
Fenny Stratford
My concern lately has been that the Russian don't have enough weapons left to do the job properly. Back in the Cold War days the Soviet Union had more than enough to ensure that most of us would be killed outright or would die rapidly afterwards of radiation, injuries or similar (think Threads). These days whilst the Russians have more than enough weapons to blast us back to the stone age I worry that my chance of not being killed either outright or rapidly has diminished and I might actually be cursed enough to survive for a few weeks or months before finally succumbing to starvation, disease or similar.

Not that I think it's particularly likely though.
Redcar is a gonna. The steel and chemical works might be dead or dying but Teesport is still a deep water port, there are still active petrochemical facilities and Hartlepooh has a nice nuclear power station to add to the glowing waste. Oh and Catterick ain't far away.

have a good day ;)

PS Milton Keynes is a gonna also: The FCO "admin" centre at Hanslope Park is going to be on a list somewhere as I am sure will be RAF Croughton which is "communications" centre. There are also a number of highly important data centres in MK that i am sure would be of intrest to our Russian friends.
 
Last edited:

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
16,063
Location
St Albans
Here's a youtube video that popped up on my TV a few days ago. It shows a simulation of a full-on conflict between Russia and NATO. The timeline and the distribution of deaths might surprise some.

For those that lost sleep after watching Threads or When the Wind Blows, best not to go there.
 

McRhu

Member
Joined
14 Oct 2015
Messages
667
Location
Lanark
FWIW There was a plan (1980s) to put one down on the UK every 20 miles in a grid pattern. Certain targets had the dubious privilege of having multiple strikes (eg: Ravenscraig and associated works in Motherwell had 7). For the life of me I cannot recall where I got that info from though, so take it with a pinch of plutonium. And FWIW^2 I also think a nuclear attack extremely^10 unlikely.
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
31,129
Location
Redcar
Redcar is a gonna. The steel and chemical works might be dead or dying but Teesport is still a deep water port, there are still active petrochemical facilities and Hartlepooh has a nice nuclear power station to add to the glowing waste. Oh and Catterick ain't far away.

have a good day ;)
I live in hope! If that's, er, the right phrase :lol:
 

GusB

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2016
Messages
8,181
Location
Elginshire
Well, I'm situated between RAF Lossiemouth and Kinloss barracks. I'll be on the beach with my bottle of malt.

It was nice knowing you all! :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top