/sci/ - Science & Math

because if you use them on any country they will nuke you back.

how hard are they to make/get and how expensive?

what do you mean "anymore"? Are you implying that dropping atomic bombs on each other has ever been a regular occurrence?

>>3232601
japan got nuked...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppB8rQVfsAU&NR=1

>>3232597
there is always risk i guess, what if you one can keep it a secret and no one finds out
>>3232601
around 50-70 years yes, most of them not very powerfull enough to say atomic but still there was nuking going on

M.A.D

>>3232616
thank you for the information, captain obvious. I said REGULAR OCCURRENCE. not twice in the entire history of man.

>>3232616
twice in one week then nothing for 65 years is hardly a regular occurrence

>>3232618
>secret
>huge nuclear explosion

also nuclear weapons have got less powerful recently as their acuuracy increased

Illuminati obv

>>3232625
pffctchch!!
umad?

this shit belongs on /news/ ...

>>3232618
>around 50-70 years yes, most of them not very powerfull enough to say atomic but still there was nuking going on

>>3232676
what is this I don't even...

>>3232633
i think you didnt get the point, lets say you are the president of a country, the main city gets nuked, now what do you do to find out who did it?

There's generally no need for it. Conventional explosives fill the tactical niche without all the fallout, both in the political and environmental sense. Conventional explosives can't compete with nuclear weapons in higher yields, but, then again, strategic warheads are unnecessary except as a deterrent. Any actual use of a city-destroying hydrogen bomb in combat would result in very unpleasant consequences for everyone.

Plus, you know, treaties.

>>3232691
Are you talking about a suitcase nuke?

>>3232691
Ok... what's your point? this has never happened. Are you trying to ask why this never happens?

Nukes have become so infamous that they have become useless. The first country to launch a nuke at any one else is the first country to elect a truly insane person to lead it.

Here's your answer OP:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction

>>3232691
From the trace isotopes in the air, you can figure out where the uranium came from. They're traceable.

MAD ?, brb use simple words, its not fare!, picture you're the president of fuckitan, you're annoyed at america and their sexy miniskirts, woman cant wear miniskirts in your country, so why do their should ?, so you go onto a camara and say "hey america, we hate you im making war to you", 5 seconds later you're the dead president of radioactivancrateristan and 120000 citizens died without a warning,

funny thing is that, when some country goes to war, they army and their institutions go to war not really often guerrillas/anarchist groups and armed citizens get in the way, but still most of the country is still inhabited by unaware and uncaring citizens,

well, until the day someone develops a nuke that can selectively kill armies and armed non-neutral civilians, there wont be any nuke detonations trololol

Seriously?

Do you want us to just destroy the planet?

If WWII would've occurred with today's technology, we would have all been fucked.

>>3233580
I don`t think you are very smart...

Sure is MAD. (see, I made a cleaver joke)

>>3233580
Two nuclear weapons have been used against nations as a military asset. It's not quite that easy to get nuked or order use of nuclear ordinance. Due to the radioactive and international fallout that would immediately result from any above-ground use of nuclear weapons for any reason, no one wants to.

>>3232587 [OP]
Look at Eastern Europe during the Cold War. Despite the extensive nuclear stockpiling by the United States, the most powerful objects on the planet were too powerful to stop the formation of communist "buffer states."
>Don't use a sledgehammer to perform brain surgery.

>>3232587
Quite simple really, as already mentioned,MAD , or

"mutually assured destruction"

Basically means, if say Russia launch's all its nukes at the USA, the USA will have enough time while Russias are in flight to launch all THEIRS back. its a lose-lose situation, everybody dies.

With the exception terrorists getting a hold of one and blowing it up somewhere, using it in actual country vs country wars, it likely wont ever happen again.

>>3233650

A vid to back up this good anon's post

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeOHEU7Ykyg

Well OP, herein lies your problem. Since the beginning of time, a breed of lemurs known as Sugar Bitches have been developing methods of advancements in medicine and technology. To our misfortune, they have fucked more than a horny rabbit on a rainy day. There. Are. Thousands. If we are to blow each other to dust with our A-Bombs, if you will, we will have no chance against this retched species.
We must also smoke less meth, that will solve global warming. I hope i was to some assistance

>>3233670
"Long time ago when we was MAD."

Awesome song.

>>3233210
>your filename: Kirk holds invisible shit.jpg
>kirk
>kirk
>kirk

I don't fucking think so, Tim

Global supply chains, how do they work?
The age of war is coming to an end.