Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hoa Hao who wrote (761269)	4/14/2022 1:20:08 PM
From: skinowski	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793725

I’m by no means an expert on this… but, afaik, the US do have at least a few hundred smaller, tactical nuclear weapons. Russia, supposedly, has a few times as many. Using them is not easy - even small devices - like the 15 kiloton bomb in Hiroshima- are very powerful and leave lots of radiation. There is a very justifiable taboo on using them - and no one used them since 1945. I think it is quite likely that Russia may use them — if it becomes clear that they’re losing this war. And, yes - this would lead to at least some escalation. No one knows where that would stop. Unfortunately - tragically, really - in case of a major strategic nuclear exchange NO ONE will escape the consequences. The article at the bottom of this linked post makes that clear. Most victims would die of hunger and exposure. Sounds like it’s “almost” preferable to die in the explosion. Message 33797645