Biden- We are the closest to nuclear armageddon since the Cuban Missile Crisis

[WV222]

https://twitter.com/kaitlancollins/status/1578182142315532288?s=20&t=e-vpnj9...

[HillGoose]

lmao if putin even thinks about it NATO probably has rods from god to deploy and end the whole thing before it even begins

i am not concerned at all, the russkies can't do anything to the US

idk why biden would say this even?

[John Dule]

Can someone with some knowledge of nuclear science tell me what would happen if the Chernobyl containment dome was struck by a stray missile?

[HillGoose]

Can someone with some knowledge of nuclear science tell me what would happen if the Chernobyl containment dome was struck by a stray missile?

splode

[Adam Griffin]

Can someone with some knowledge of nuclear science tell me what would happen if the Chernobyl containment dome was struck by a stray missile?

Obviously not an expert, but I imagine there's plenty of Russian incentive to avoid the area. Most of the concentrated radiation from the initial accident found its way into Belarus and Russia - and while some bad concentrations landed within Ukraine and a good portion of western Europe, rogue wind patterns at the right time played a pretty big role in irradiating spots west of the site (something not likely to repeat unless a strategic strike is the desired outcome).

[Crumpets]

Can someone with some knowledge of nuclear science tell me what would happen if the Chernobyl containment dome was struck by a stray missile?

It might pollute the air downwind until they got it fixed, but it would not be on the level of the 1986 disaster. Not least because nobody lives in the immediate vicinity anymore and Ukraine would be much more transparent about precautions people should take than the USSR was. If you want a historical comparison, something like the 1957 Windscale fire might be reasonably close in a worst-case scenario. I also wouldn't worry much about that just because Chernobyl hasn't been in a contested area since April.

And I can't say for certain, but the New Safe Confinement and the Sarcophagus underneath might have been built to withstand missile strikes up to a certain size. So best case scenario, it just dents the roof.

[Alben Barkley]

Well I know what I'm watching next.

[Crumpets]

Just my two cents on the Biden quote, but I think this is probably 40% based on real concerns and 60% to emphasize to Putin that there will be a serious response if Russia tries to do a "limited" nuclear strike. There's probably a cohort in Moscow trying to downplay the potential risks of a strike to get a gamechanger in Ukraine, and everyone involved needs to make sure that whatever gains Putin might hope to get by using nukes would be more than canceled out by the response from every other country. Classic deterrence strategy and hopefully one that's not spun as Biden "sabre rattling" or whatever when it's aimed at learning the likelihood of a nuclear exchange and not encouraging it.

And fwiw, I've been pretty confident this has all been a bluff by Russia since the start. There are a ton of indicators you can look for to see whether Putin is seriously considering using nukes - submarine movements, activity at known nuclear sites, how many senior members of the Russian government are in Moscow, etc. It's mostly over my head, but the people I know who follow that stuff for a living at least seem confident that a nuclear strike is not imminent, although "not imminent" and "impossible" are not the same thing.

If you're still concerned, here's a good, long video on the topic that'll hopefully help people rest easy at night.

[Alben Barkley]

I do worry we're in the perfect situation for nukes to come out. We have an absolute sociopath with no obvious trace of humanity in him (unlike, say, Khrushchev). Someone who has shown no qualms about committing cold-blooded murder repeatedly in the past. Someone who is now backed into a corner and, in old age, has his entire life potentially on the line. It's not too unreasonable to think that he might just launch the nukes and bring the whole world down with him because he does not care about what happens to the rest of the world. It's like a child smashing the chessboard because he lost. Do you really think Hitler wouldn't have done the same if he had nukes while in the bunker? No doubt he would have ordered strikes on all his enemies if possible, just to drag as many down with him as possible. It's pretty f--king scary, tbh. MAD assumes rational actors who want to avoid nuclear war. It doesn't account for MADmen who no longer care if their country is destroyed as long as they can destroy others as well.

[Beet]

I told you, the president is not as enthusiastic about nuclear war as Atlas is. One of the advantages of having someone insanely old up there is that they remember real sh**. Too bad our next president wont.

[Alben Barkley]

I told you, the president is not as enthusiastic about nuclear war as Atlas is.

Nobody except lunatics WANTS nuclear war. This does not translate into wanting to appease the madman threatening everyone with nuclear war, however. Like, at all.

Indeed, removing him from power may be the best and may well prove to be the ONLY way to STOP nuclear war!

As I said, Putin may be uniquely positioned to actually WANT to use nukes in a way some Russian successor would not be. Any more than Karl Donitz wanted to bring all of Germany down with him compared to Adolf Hitler.

[Beet]

I told you, the president is not as enthusiastic about nuclear war as Atlas is.

Nobody except lunatics WANTS nuclear war. This does not translate into wanting to appease the madman threatening everyone with nuclear war, however. Like, at all.

Indeed, removing him from power may be the best and may well prove to be the ONLY way to STOP nuclear war!

Attempting to do so could also CAUSE a nuclear war.

Nobody here seems to want to admit that.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Regime change in Russia is not realistic (unless we have support within the Kremlin) and using nukes will do the world more injustice than Putin ever could deal to Ukraine.

[Alben Barkley]

I told you, the president is not as enthusiastic about nuclear war as Atlas is.

Nobody except lunatics WANTS nuclear war. This does not translate into wanting to appease the madman threatening everyone with nuclear war, however. Like, at all.

Indeed, removing him from power may be the best and may well prove to be the ONLY way to STOP nuclear war!

Attempting to do so could also CAUSE a nuclear war.

Nobody here seems to want to admit that.

Not doing so could ALSO cause a nuclear war.

YOU don't seem to want to admit that.

Again, Putin may be the single most likely individual on the planet to launch nukes for highly specific reasons. Removing that threat may well be the safest thing for the planet.

What's your alternative anyway? Complete and total submission to his every whim? Because to me, and I'm sure the people of Ukraine, that is no option at all. I'd rather be dead than subject to the whims of a homicidal madman.

[Alben Barkley]

Regime change in Russia is not realistic (unless we have support within the Kremlin) and using nukes will do the world more injustice than Putin ever could deal to Ukraine.

Trust me, we DO have support within the Kremlin. There is NO WAY we don't. I base this on reports that we are prepared to do a decapitation strike with agents "deep inside the heart of the Kremlin," on the well-documented discontent among many high-ranking Russians with Putin's madness (you can literally see it on their faces in that last crazed speech he gave), and common sense. The CIA is the most advanced intelligence agency on the planet, and Russia our longest-standing foe. You REALLY think we haven't prepared for this contingency for YEARS?

And literally no one except Putin is threatening to use nukes. We're all debating the best way to disarm the monkey with a machine gun, not claiming we want to start firing machine guns chaotically ourselves.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Regime change in Russia is not realistic (unless we have support within the Kremlin) and using nukes will do the world more injustice than Putin ever could deal to Ukraine.

Trust me, we DO have support within the Kremlin. There is NO WAY we don't.

And literally no one except Putin is threatening to use nukes. We're all debating the best way to disarm the monkey with a machine gun, not claiming we want to start firing machine guns chaotically ourselves.

That's why the best way to remove Putin from power is by a coup courtesy of our intelligence community and whatever allied types may support the task. It's not nuclear weapons.

[Alben Barkley]

Regime change in Russia is not realistic (unless we have support within the Kremlin) and using nukes will do the world more injustice than Putin ever could deal to Ukraine.

Trust me, we DO have support within the Kremlin. There is NO WAY we don't.

And literally no one except Putin is threatening to use nukes. We're all debating the best way to disarm the monkey with a machine gun, not claiming we want to start firing machine guns chaotically ourselves.

That's why the best way to remove Putin from power is by a coup courtesy of our intelligence community and whatever allied types may support the task. It's not nuclear weapons.

I agree completely. I've never once advocated for using nuclear weapons, rather a decapitation strike/coup. It's Beet who argued with me on THAT, saying it would risk nuclear war somehow more than just letting the monkey keep the machine gun.

Hell, he even said that even if Putin DOES nuke Ukraine, we STILL shouldn't respond with a decapitation strike. Again, I didn't even say we should nuke Russia at that point despite it being justified. Just take out Putin. And he STILL thought that was too extreme a response to a literal nuclear attack.

[Anti-Trump Truth Socialite JD Vance Enjoying Juror]

Can someone with some knowledge of nuclear science tell me what would happen if the Chernobyl containment dome was struck by a stray missile?

Radiation would start to leak out, but it wouldn’t detonate if that’s what you’re wondering. The worst case scenario is that it starts another fire and more radioactive smoke and dust gets released.

[Beet]

I told you, the president is not as enthusiastic about nuclear war as Atlas is.

Nobody except lunatics WANTS nuclear war. This does not translate into wanting to appease the madman threatening everyone with nuclear war, however. Like, at all.

Indeed, removing him from power may be the best and may well prove to be the ONLY way to STOP nuclear war!

Attempting to do so could also CAUSE a nuclear war.

Nobody here seems to want to admit that.

Not doing so could ALSO cause a nuclear war.

YOU don't seem to want to admit that.

Again, Putin may be the single most likely individual on the planet to launch nukes for highly specific reasons. Removing that threat may well be the safest thing for the planet.

What's your alternative anyway? Complete and total submission to his every whim? Because to me, and I'm sure the people of Ukraine, that is no option at all. I'd rather be dead than subject to the whims of a homicidal madman.

You are free to die if you want, but there are millions of Americans who want to live.

My alternative is to keep doing what we're already doing. Russia isn't going to use nukes so it's a moot point.

[John Dule]

Can someone with some knowledge of nuclear science tell me what would happen if the Chernobyl containment dome was struck by a stray missile?

It might pollute the air downwind until they got it fixed, but it would not be on the level of the 1986 disaster. Not least because nobody lives in the immediate vicinity anymore and Ukraine would be much more transparent about precautions people should take than the USSR was. If you want a historical comparison, something like the 1957 Windscale fire might be reasonably close in a worst-case scenario. I also wouldn't worry much about that just because Chernobyl hasn't been in a contested area since April.

And I can't say for certain, but the New Containment Structure and the Sarcophagus underneath might have been built to withstand missile strikes up to a certain size. So best case scenario, it just dents the roof.

Really, a small thermonuclear warhead wouldn't do the trick? I figured that a WMD blowing up the Elephant's Foot would cause serious radioactive contamination in the groundwater.

[Beet]

Regime change in Russia is not realistic (unless we have support within the Kremlin) and using nukes will do the world more injustice than Putin ever could deal to Ukraine.

Trust me, we DO have support within the Kremlin. There is NO WAY we don't.

And literally no one except Putin is threatening to use nukes. We're all debating the best way to disarm the monkey with a machine gun, not claiming we want to start firing machine guns chaotically ourselves.

That's why the best way to remove Putin from power is by a coup courtesy of our intelligence community and whatever allied types may support the task. It's not nuclear weapons.

I agree completely. I've never once advocated for using nuclear weapons, rather a decapitation strike/coup. It's Beet who argued with me on THAT, saying it would risk nuclear war somehow more than just letting the monkey keep the machine gun.

Hell, he even said that even if Putin DOES nuke Ukraine, we STILL shouldn't respond with a decapitation strike. Again, I didn't even say we should nuke Russia at that point despite it being justified. Just take out Putin. And he STILL thought that was too extreme a response to a literal nuclear attack.

I didn't say it's too extreme, just dangerous. Removing a foreign head of state is an act of war so it could cause the start of a nuclear war between the US and Russia. I don't WANT that to be a risk of what you're proposing but it is one.

[HillGoose]

I told you, the president is not as enthusiastic about nuclear war as Atlas is.

Nobody except lunatics WANTS nuclear war. This does not translate into wanting to appease the madman threatening everyone with nuclear war, however. Like, at all.

Indeed, removing him from power may be the best and may well prove to be the ONLY way to STOP nuclear war!

Attempting to do so could also CAUSE a nuclear war.

Nobody here seems to want to admit that.

Not doing so could ALSO cause a nuclear war.

YOU don't seem to want to admit that.

Again, Putin may be the single most likely individual on the planet to launch nukes for highly specific reasons. Removing that threat may well be the safest thing for the planet.

What's your alternative anyway? Complete and total submission to his every whim? Because to me, and I'm sure the people of Ukraine, that is no option at all. I'd rather be dead than subject to the whims of a homicidal madman.

You are free to die if you want, but there are millions of Americans who want to live.

My alternative is to keep doing what we're already doing. Russia isn't going to use nukes so it's a moot point.

better dead than red brah

the russkies can't do anything to destroy the world anyway, and if they try i'm sure the military-industrial complex will put an end to it before it begins with some high-tech stuff we don't even know about

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The Cuban Missile Crisis had a lot to do with nukes, but not the way most people realize. The Soviet Union wanted those missiles in Turkey and Italy aimed at them removed so badly that they made it seem like Kennedy totally won the crisis.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

No we're not we know what happens in Nuke war they showed us in Terminator that the world people get burned alive, but if NATO puts troops in Ukraine which we're not gonna do, that will trigger a nuke strike

Users or politicians thinking Putin is gonna burn people alive, it's not gonna happen, we were so close to Nuke war during the Kennedy Assassination but we had just came out of Cuban Missile crisis that's what stopped us from going to WW III with Russia

[emailking]

No we're not we know what happens in Nuke war they showed us in Terminator that the world people get burned alive, but if NATO puts troops in Ukraine which we're not gonna do, that will trigger a nuke strike

Users or politicians thinking Putin is gonna burn people alive, it's not gonna happen, we were so close to Nuke war during the Kennedy Assassination but we had just came out of Cuban Missile crisis that's what stopped us from going to WW III with Russia

You saw T2 Sellers?