What are you babbling about? It's what supposedly deters nuclear war. Complete annihilation. You're thinking of tactical nukes. Not a nuclear exchange. Where okay. A tactical nuke seeks an achievable victory. A nuclear exchange seeks to destroy an enemy. Hence the deterrence doctrine is called, again that buzzword, or adopted phrase; Mutually assured destruction. It's also why no tactical nukes have been deployed in combat yet.
But we're talking about deep bunkers and access to locations which supposedly can survive nuclear war. The problem is there's nothing left to be in command of. They'll probably just become cannibals anyway. Love, Sex, and Robots.
There is actually. Reportedly that building where they house the NSA supercomputer. Or the AT&T coms. The skyscraper with no windows. The one in the recent Xfiles with the Mandela effect. It supposedly can survive a nuclear blast. At least that's what it was designed for.
Yea none can. Topically I was being sarcastic. In my op post. I responded to you from the other topic we conversed.
You either believe in nukes. In which case it's mutually assured destruction. It means annihilation. It theoretically can become planetary, but at least the majority of a nation fired on. And when they have more nukes than the nation they're firing at. It often becomes more than just a theory. Partners, defense pacts, alliances, could see far more involved when it comes to warfare, and any placement of them often means multiple launches by separate nations. Causing? Okay. Simple not bullshit. Bullshit denying them.
We can then debate strategy, firing at, and tactical use. Obviously there isn't much strategy, first strike, knock out capability. It effectively is the military, population, and infrastructure welding them, or simply firing them first and often in regards to being targeted by opposing warfare. There is also firing after being fired on. It a can translate into a confirmation of an incoming attack that can see them returned, or it's by direct attack. Outside of this there are faster tactical nukes. These have yet to become engaged, and they'll likely be directed purposefully at an enemy to force surrender, or destroy any capabilities.
Who really cares? Except it's not really a case of ohh that's a green zone, and that's a red zone, when it comes to nukes. Like the former poster was suggesting. Please leave the Statue of Libery standing. It's UNESCO. No, fuck that. It's some other MAD doctrine.
Not on MAD. Mutually Assured Destruction. The goal is annihilation. They cannot prevent, submarines, supersonic bombers, dead man's switches, and mobile launchers. Sure there is some cover and assumed prevention. Guidance and increasing capability. Until it's outpaced by hypersonics. Instead it's density, and infrastructure. Or ideally such a zero, there is nothing left to be in command of. A restart resetting the planet. Making it a notion of strict deterrent. Except it is becoming out the window when ding ding ding they're faster popping up everywhere and becoming adopted. Is this deterrence, or essentially MAD?
The grid is the first thing launched at, communications and satellites. Then it's the command structure, capitals, and large population centers, disabling supply lines, and obviously large military installations, and airports, and ports. But in that spread it's sooner covering density and infrastructure. Where multiple warheads are fired from the same launch vehicles. Example there are single launched nukes which can host about 25 warheads, what is that radius, 500-1000 miles? What is the radius of let's suggest it hosting 5. They break off blasting an area. It's blanket damage. Give a flying fuck. The dust has hit your presumed green zone regardless. No, there is no, first thing. But there is speculation.
In MAD which is the current deterrence doctrine. It effectively is still a zero. Despite modern tactical debates of scenarios like proxies and specifically guided at direct installations. Effectively it is debating if victory is achievable. First strike, context, and definitions. Or if their use cascades into total annihilation.
Are you buying the stale chocolate from those sweatshops? The ones where on a hot day it still sits on the shelf waiting for some chump, normally a dumb kid or fatso to make a purchase. It's all nice and really sweaty. And it came directly from another market where it was resold even cheaper. Until counterfeit chocolate is bigger business.
It's a surreal context tempting fate. A 13 century prophecy. Vague as always when rattling the bones and full of yarn. Until they've purposefully preceeded with its succession, or the notions of its vague prophecy, where each pope was prophesied. Until the last pope is supposedly the current one. And the Church has changed, becoming unrecognisable, Batman's redeemer, or pedopete's. But hadn't it changed the most after WW1 with the fall of the Empire? No not British, Austrian. In any event ominous foreboding as always with prophecy, where Baba Vanga suggests Rome will be destroyed, or something?
The original MAD doctrine was fire on everything. Cold War, shit. Theory of would you even want another cunt emerging from that clash been technology and powers. Some other lost tribe from bongaboo, later ruling the planet. So how many nukes did they build. Enough to target the planet several times. Insuring almost complete annihilation. Or the theories of it, off the weapons prepared. Since improving targeting and guidance. Supposedly tactical and what not. Placing in greater debates, scenarios, and rules. Hiding deeper bunkers. But even so, density and infrastructure aren't off the table, nothing theoretically is. If it goes there.
An easier scenario could see them used to prevent further use. But it ain't happening yet. At this rate who knows.
Would a nuke in Ukraine see the entire planet kick off? Would a nuke on Taiwan? Or Iran? Or North Korea?
I bet there are people or programs who calculate it? Of course a person suggests alliances, and defense pacts. But when you're considering the original doctrine. Would it see MAD off any proxies? These questions are being asked. Easier to just propose MAD. In doing so how many more nukes are there today? And faster emerging programs adopting them. Until it becomes MAD, anyway. Or rather not.
Until today, even on this forum, they think they aren't for real. For fucks sake. Not a pretty calculation.
He exposed Twitter as a government asset. He did that. Now who trusts Twitter? It's a propaganda outlet full of government shills, and bots, rigged, corrupt, and just plain nasty. Some free speech. Fuck Twitter. What you say about him, there, what can you say? It exposed Twitter as amoral.
Hahaha. Fall back. No. What would they awake too? The greater depression? Civil War? No. You'd sooner be in war abroad. Rather than sounding a bugle, and cascading into civil revolt. But it's another plan B. Because right now where is that grip. Who actually trusts their current government? It means any oppositiomal party is a potential favourite. Can't keep playing that tape when all they offer is a greater collapse into the mounting debts of a larger recession, and partisan politics. More bullshit promises to keep them voting and the price rising. So who are you actually empowering today? It's the competition. Not happening without a? I dunno chuck you tell me where we're at?
Or belief in the unicorns. Because there's nothing but even more shit coming. No matter what you believe in.
As a target why not. The nuclear power grid is enough to fuck up quite a few states.
Let's suggest ground zero was NYC. Using that nuclear ballistic denotation graph with all the World's nuke types on it.
Now match it into industry, energy, population. In a blast radius of 20 miles, fallout of another 50. It would take out at least 6-10 reactors. Now you've knocked out, how much energy in the other states? Not to mention supply lines. Plus there's the dust, blowing across, and survivors, straining any other services, and operations.
You'd be utterly naive to assume when they fly, some of the first targets aren't population centers. Just military. Nope, not the way to make them yield. At least not in WW2. Military you won't hit as easily, mobile launchers. Stealth planes. Submarines. Sure your hits might be on some military facilities, but these are often in the same blast radius.
It's called MAD. Mutually assured destruction. Why?
The other reason you'd hit NYC is communications, and the stock market. If they fly. It's an obvious target. Not speculation. Same with a lot of density and infrastructure.
Depends on the era. It depends on the shroom. It depends on the influence. If violence is the theme, what's your trip, what's that rush?
Those edible shrooms, dried out kind, cheap, taste like bark, just tend to make everything liquid. Like walls and shit start breathing, and rippling, or they become liquefied? Like ripples, such as waves and buoyancy, kind of like veins running through them. It's alive, you start feeling a wall or some shit, like your beer can, thinking it's really moving. Why is that vagina biting me. What? Then there are the reflections and the shadows. But most of the time, unless you're eating them by the kilo they don't cause much other shit. But there are the more potent ones, life threatening, toxic, they can send you right out for hours into places that can be bad or good depending on your high.
Wasn't LSD created by those lab geeks for manchurian candidates. Post hypnotic suggestion? It is far stronger right. Those trips hallucinate much more, and depending on its dosage can be quite fatal.
But we're talking a ritual to encourage frenzy and blood lust. It was likely the shrooms, because other plants weren't as available to them.
It actually is because they often buy into a debt. Everytime they do the price rises. Who buys it upfront. Not many, they'll buy a mortgage. Causing what's that word fucko. Inflation. Let's suggest they buy stocks as investment. What happens. Does the shares rise in price. Is this called inflation? No, seriously. So when a bunch of assholes demand another Condo, or skyscraper. Does it push the surrounding property prices up higher. Let's suggest it was in a prime location, like a capital city? When does the price fall, it really doesn't until a collapse. In fact these fuckos make the price rise to profit off it more. Like selling a house once you paid off that mortgage, you want more value on it, looks for another owner, then what price is that house? Less or more? Now we do it on almost every venture capitalism offers today. It simply seeks more investment until the price keeps rising. Like these shitball players. They need a brand new shitball player every year, because have a guess. It causes more investment. It gets worse when it needs managers, and stadiums. Now what is the price? But do they play any better today. No they really don't, it's the same shitball it always has been. Worse in fact. They cost so much more. Not only do they cost even more, they have caused hyper inflation. Until you're literally paying taxes to the debts these clubs have caused, apart from the even more expensive merchandise, tickets, and subscriptions. What did you buy, monkeys.
But it isn't all of it. No. Not when it comes to living costs and hyper inflation. I am sure you'll tell me about it.
There's no ceasefire. In fact the Ukraine is getting hit much harder. Despite of any other opinion or ham-fisted acting.
Russia doesn't need a ceasefire. When it grants them, it's often for a prisoner exchange. Or simply to keep partners appeased.
Any peace deals are so far off. Then they'll simply be for an undisputed fact of that is Russia, and that's now a much lesser Ukraine. I have no idea how that future works. Except for increasing military build up. Then coverage often becomes less.
War news has become boring. It being banned outside of Ukrainian propaganda. When all it was is another missile strike on Ukraine, demanding more aid, and inserting another Ghost of causalities. There is far more Western controversy occuring.
Your stalker is Russian? Yea you might be right. But I don't think they care. Opinion at this point, they don't need it.
Shrooms, and human blood. Nothing to do with bear gall bladders. They might have had a rite of passage killing the bear or wolf. But it wasn't the gauntlet, they'd practice in and run, or the shield walls they'd fight to the death in. Ultimately what psyched them was endurance, blood rituals, pagantry, and even human sacrifice. They took slaves, they human sacrificed. They believed their gods were immortal. Dying on the battlefields took them to Valhalla. If they took a potion for it, it had the shrooms.
Japan's current government is sending aid to the Ukraine anyway in the note of billions while massively strengthening ties with the EU. Security, manufacture, etc. It's also allowing increasing refugees, and sending increasing aid.
Don't know what it has to do with a former prime minister at all, who was reluctant to other policies regionally. One of which, held up, regional security, it was compensation to South Korea and Taiwan for WW2 comfort women. But it wasn't so much him. Simple policy. Although wasn't he in the middle of a larger scandal where diplomacy became questioned? A Japanese corporation got banned from South Korea due to this. Or otherwise. Joint military operations also became affected.
Who knows? To be frank it was probably just a nutter. Easier that way.
Yawn. But he wasn't against any of that. He paved a way for it. Besides any of these nutjob policies aren't for bettering humanity. They're simply designed to piss it off. They're getting the nationalist population, angry. Why? Aren't those Drums, beating?
Did they think the population cursed by the increasing dystopia is pleased or angry. Does it cow. Or does it increasingly protest. Tell me does it listen to the cunts restricting them. Have they even made it better. Until you just feel sorry for this generation today. It doesn't know the meaning of freedom. All it knows is inflation.
In the middle of every other domestic. It just gets them angrier. Ultimately it takes something else getting rid of it. It is where it is faster at.
That day it inserted a bunch of queers and niggers calling them art, but it turns around and bans them for any other expression, putting them all into lock down and face masks. Real simple this World won't last. Japan with its increasing nigger gay bars. Isn't a future for Japan. It's a future for niggers. I guess like good bitches they take it right up their ass, listening to another dystopian robot, putting them in bigger debts, as they immigrate another banana boat load of monkeys telling them they're so racist for not opening another nigger gay bar. What happens?
Yawn. They were cooked up in lab. They were cooked for profit and control. Sometimes they started as good intentions, a cure for bullshit, or a medicine, until being used for simple greed. Nothing spiritual about it. It paid.
The Independent was owned by the Irish, then a former KGB, oligarch? Until a Mid-East Sultan owns the largest share in it.
Capitalism is full of bullshit. It sells to whoever pays more for it. It's called inflation. This is why everything gets more expensive. But the quality just gets worse. This woke culture, I wonder where it came from, has even started removing nudity, but not unless they're rainbows, instead it adds black people into everything. Such amazing art. The press it writes is completely woke, screaming down with the establishment, as anybody nationalist is targeted for the diversity of sexual genders, or ethnicity.
But you don't live over there, you visited.
Suddenly a documentary airing it, is wrong. Because in the smaller glimpse of experience you had. It amounted to monkeys?
See what I deal with.
What was so hard getting through that dumber head of yours. It was so hard to imagine they were being worn. Then Covid mandated everybody wearing them. Impossible with a monkey. They just want to flick shit.
They were worn as protection against pollution levels. But they don't do much, however against dust they offer smaller protection. A relatively new phenomenon since specifically the Paris accord. Pollution levels, smog. But they were there especially in that part of Asia. Even on that James Bond from 1967.
It's not MSN. Dumbass. Why would I trust a monkey's life experience? I really don't.
Precisely. You've understood it. MAD.
However there will always be tactical nukes. Because of the asteroids.
But there will always be the what if you have achieved victory. Let's suggest you're suicidal to achieve it. What is victory today. Profit. But what if. You have the resources and or location to ride out a planetary reset. Who needs population? You wanted to Georgia Guidestones. Ride out Nuclear winter. Or you're a crazy terrorist with a briefcase? Or just another rogue cunt willing to bring on some other prophecy?
With the increasing armament brings the increasing risk. Until they're almost becoming deployed, or soon could be.