@@Recht_voor_zijn_raap exactly, and people celebrate the idiot who invented the nuclear bomb. Possibly the only planet in the entire universe and we build bomb that could destroy it 🤦
@@DarrellW_UK Because it can be argued that the root of conflict is due to the fact that we ARE thinking creatures. Our individual minds all have different ideas, desires and morals yet they all must try to coexist within a fairly basic social structure that has limitations. Sometimes those differences in thoughts can be so opposed that there is no ability to negotiate a satisfactory outcome for each party. Your neighbor wants to have your family as their own. You dont want that to happen. How do you get a mutual satisfactory outcome from that, better yet WHY would you even want to try? If right now as you read this a random person just kicks in your door and says this place and all inside it is theirs now, would you try to negotiate a deal with them that would satisfy you both? Or would you try to defend your territory? Call the police? Wars are just that same basic problem just much higher on the social ladder. That isnt a "failure" of anything, its a side effect of being individual thinking creatures.
Imagine, just imagine if all the military spending of the world would be spent on space exploration and improving life world wide. Damn are we humans dumb and stupid.
@@kamata066 It would not have been possible IF all nation had no military to attack others. Can't you see how it goes? One country gets the Atomic bomb the others want it. So if no one has it, it just does not lead others to have it. I am speaking about a world where greed, sneak, selfishness and so on does NOT exist. Basically humans have evolved to the point where they don't think of attacking each other but more work with each other. When you don't have factories that build tanks, when you don't have factories that don't build bombs then no one will have them. Maybe I am thinking way too much into the good world and where we are or WHO we are is evil and heartless.
Immediate casualties seem on point. Over the next few months and years, those numbers will skyrocket. What was once 1.5 million could easily surpass 5 million
@waynereiffenstein7153 the "nuclear winter" theory has been disproven with new calculations it would take nearly every nuke we have on earth being used (unlikely since most aren't on ready alert), and all those bombs hitting its target (unlikely with missile defense). Humanity would live, society as it currently is, unlikely.
2 aliens are talking in outer space, looking down on Earth. "It seems the inhabitants of planet Earth have created nuclear technology and missiles" says one alien "are they showing signs of intelligence?" asks the other "I dont think so. They seem to be aiming at themselves"
The one silver lining is nobody can use them without killing themselves, in one way or another. As in the War Games movie, the only way to win this game is to not play it.
@@bravebeard6225 The original 5 are only likely to launch against each other, probably NATO vs Russia & China, either way there's a massive response. Israel, India and Pakistan only have beef with their neighbours, meaning radiation clouds blowing back over them. North Korea would either attack the US which means invasion from likely North and South, or would attack South Korea meaning radiation clouds again. There's no win to be had, they only make sense as an existential threat warning.
I used to be awed by the power of nuclear weapons but now I'm simply terrified. Should this civilization ending power be controlled by a few fragile and sometimes undependable leaders? I definitely don't want the fate of the entire world decided by events in Ukraine and other territorial disputes.
@imrich884 Even a small probability of them being used in any given year eventually adds up to a 100 % certainty that they'll be used. Unless they become seen as the vile 💩 they are, and our overlords catch up with us peasants and fall over themselves in their haste to clean this crap off the face of the earth.
@@carmgitto Mutually-Assured Destruction (MAD) worked during the 45 years of the Cold War, I don't see why it wouldn't work now. Nobody wants to launch a first strike.
98% of all the ISIS fighters, the Sri Lanka government forces, Al Shabob, the Taliban, the Russians fighting in Ukraine and in other world conflicts have never heard of the "Geneva Conventions" or do not believe in them. They were worthless to both Japanese and German military's in WW II and was worthless in the 2 atomic bombs dropped on Japan.
The initial blinfing flash and mushroom cloud is fascinating. And then there's the massive, exciting fires that no one nearby will be left to see. And then there's just huge grey black radioactive dead wastelands, forever.
@insideoutsideupsidedown2218 What was dropped on those 3 cities were very small compared to the magnitude of today's nuclear weapons. And there'd be a good chance of no rescue coming, due to multiple cities (and even countries) being hit.
I used to work on a missile fire crew for the United States Army. What never ceases to amaze me, is when people say things like “That’s why I’m glad I don’t live in a big city”, or “Maybe it’s safer to live in another country”, or stuff like that. What people are failing to understand is, if we have a nuclear war with another major country (like China or Russia), that would be the end of civilization. Let me make it crystal clear for anyone that doesn’t get the point - THAT MEANS THAT EVERYONE ON THIS PLANET WILL DIE!!! I am betting there will be people who read this who still won’t get it! 🙄
You see the root of it. Ordinary citizens will burn in the war. And those who start the war will sit in bunkers that are 3 times more impenetrable. That's why they can afford to play a risky game for money and influence.
Absolutely, no one wins. Not even the few unlucky souls who somehow survive because they were just outside of ground zero. I can't even imagine the true horror of a post-full-scale nuclear war world.
This video stands out as the first to thoroughly explain the strategic advantage of MIRVs, showcasing how they can effectively maximize destruction across a wider area while remaining more cost-efficient compared to deploying larger, single warheads. It provides a deeper understanding of the balance between military efficiency and destructive capability in modern nuclear strategy.
With population density far greater than that of the cold war the immediate death toll of a lower yield MIRV today supercedes that of a single larger yield in the 70's. As you say it showcases the change in strategy.
@@develynseether4426 i agree. tho i wish some of these videos would show what an 8 MIRV strike would look like across a major city. they only show one hit explaining the single impact. i have yet to see one that shows the full payload.
Except MIRVs are quite a bit more expensive, not just on their own to construct and maintain, but the systems that guide and deliver them. One can reasonably say that the benefits of MIRVs outweigh the increased costs, but it's important to note that this does not mean they're less expensive. Any "cost-efficiency" of note is only relevant if they're ever deployed.
This is why the Space Force type program is so crucial. Intercepting an ICBM is one thing, getting ahead of a hypersonic device is really only viable from space at this point but to Intercept an entire group of warheads is extremely difficult.
dont know man, seem it will break rule to not install weapon in space so i can see china+russia installing their nuke in orbit also space defense doesnt really help against nuclear cruise missile or hypersonic missile and you can predict satellite orbit, so if i am china+russia i will invest to jamming satellite with laser or micro wave beam
Currently, the ABM systems are still in testing, and are only 50% effective. Closure rates are over 20 thousand miles an hour in space between the interceptor and the "target." Its like shooting a built with another built that's been fired from the other side of the planet. Considering the distances, curvature of the earth, possible flight paths of the missiles, the number of warheads and spoofs, and time to engage, it's almost an impossible task to create an effective ABM system, especially when the enemy can just overwhelm it. They would need thousands of ABMs just to hit half of the incoming targets. The costs, the geographical requirements for an effective system, the decision times needed for our politicians to decide what to the do, with only minutes to spare, I don't see it really happening. I think all we can do is make sure the other guy knows he's toast if he pops off one of those things. As for hypersonics, honestly, they're not really that big of a deal. Current systems just need better ROE (rules of engagement), but the computing power is already there. See missile, track/plot, then prosecute. The human just needs to know that its ok to fire BEFORE the hypersonic is detected. ICBM's and sub launched ICBM's are actually harder to engage, and come in faster than hypersonics. So, like an ABM system, I just think hypersonics are a waste of money.
The real danger after a nuclear clash would be the dozens of nuclear power plants left unattended, melting down...possibly resulting in dozens of Fukashimas.
Yeah we do. We have weather pattern projections of travelling radiation from predicted jet stream movements. Radiation is not nearly is large of a threat from nukes as people think. Blasts definitely kill more.
@@Viper31300 you can only predict where the wind will take things. You don’t know how much ash trees, people, animals, buildings etc. make after such a blast. How long it will stay in the atmosphere, where it will land, what effect it will have on the ocean, the cooling effect? Again, you have no idea.
@@ace1776 I have a decent idea. It is possible to try and estimate. Wouldn’t be perfect, but projections have been made before about that stuff. The issue is, there’s not much of a point in trying to account for all of that. Blasts are a lot more deadly in terms of our modern weapons and doctrines for using nukes in combat.
@@Viper31300 depend type of nuke and what they nuke if they use cobalt nuke the bomb will be very radioactive and also i dont exclude move like nuking opponant nuclear power plant to turn multi ton of radioactive in nuclear power plant into nuclear dust cloud in stratosphere
Easy to kill, hard to have peace. Greed, money governments working for themselves . Nothing has changed since humans evolved into intelligent beings. The world has to have one government that works for all the peoples of earth.
the military people that saw the nuclear bomb test said there was a purple color, that they could even see it through their hands and eye lids. None of the nuclear bomb videos ever seem to show that part
America and Russia have been playing silly buggers for decades and gave spent a fortune doing so. Imagine if they had just agreed to ignore each other, how much money would they have saved? Trillions $.
I posted a suggestion for how to prevent this kind of thing. A RUclips administrator deleted it and I received a popup message warning me with account suspension if I posted it again.
It is human nature to want more resources and territory...... There is an unlimited amount in space to satisfy all appetites without any necessity for conflict..... The latter lends itself to common sense as a better choice...... In my opinion......
I though this was gonna be a second by second, minute by minute video. Like a quick streak, screen goes white, the fireball/mushroom slowly becomes visible, a thunderous boom and roar 15 or so seconds later… ya know
7:20 this is the first time any video properly explained the correct use of MIRV to clobber a far wider area of destruction that using a more expensive and huge warheads.
Controlled environment. Careful planning "like weather patterns etc". Geographical choices. And the fact that dozens if not hundreds weren't detonated all at once during testing. Not to mention there actually are measurable environmental effects from the tests, also plenty of soldiers have died of cancer after witnessing and or being involved in said test.
Also to note in the controlled tests the payload was way smaller giving them the ability to calculate the damage if a larger payload would be used for a higher yield effect
@@deoradh How is that a bold question haha. I guess it is bold to ask question around some people. So bold, sticking my neck out wondering about an obvious question as to how our lifestyles are more of a threat to the environment than setting of thousands of nuke tests. I haven't seen really anything from the environmentalists regarding these test. Based on the description of nuclear war surely even one test would and has done very serious damage to the planet?
Most tests were done in the past underground or underwater. There’s a treaty I believe on testing now and most testing is calculated on supercomputers.
The real danger after a nuclear clash would be the dozens of nuclear power plants left unattended, melting down...possibly resulting in dozens of Fukashimas.
Good video but I fundamentally disagree with the reference at the end to a "global effort for disarmament" being critical to preserving peace. The fact that world powers have these weapons has been the single biggest factor preventing a third world war breaking out, because the consequences are simply too high to ignore. Nuclear disarmament would put humanity at greater risk, perversely.
You're confusing peace with quiet... And worse, you're spitting out propaganda that was meant to condition you to this insane reality. Think about it: which is worse? Global powers spending another massive and pointless effort style WWI until our insane leaders are tired of bloodshed, or a nuclear Holocaust? In the first case, once this insane theater of war is over we can rebuild like post WWI. In the 2nd option though, several mentally unhinged numnuts are holding the entire world hostage with their finger on the red button. There's no rebuilding after such war. Also, this doesn't even consider the catastrophic mistake event which humanity has already been near multiple time (Google the incident when our early warning defense system mistaken glare reflecting from clouds for a first strike...). Again, there's no rebuilding in case of an all out nuclear war between super powers. There won't be life left on this planet, and whatever humans survive this apocalypse won't be able to rebuild for tens of thousands of years post this event. This entire insane setup only to secure economic resources and for a handful of megalomaniacs to stroke their ego. Albert Einstein said: "Man invented the nuclear bomb, but no mouse would make a mousetrap." We are an evil, insane species, controlled by even bigger insane numtuns. The Zoo Hypothesis is a god damn fact.
The numbers are a mess throughout this video. For example at 7:10 the text says 8km2, the narrator says 8km radius. These are two completely different numbers!
Crazy world we live in i understand the need for deference strength through superior firepower but to actually be living in a world where the misses start flying is a terrifying concept to contemplate nowadays
The first bomb had a bigger payload but the blast was smaller than the other ones with a smaller payload. I think your Americans bomb stats are mixed up.
He used radius in miles for the first bomb and radius in kilometers for the second, 4 miles is larger radius then 5 kilometers, i guess he did not pay attention to details 🤣, but his ranking is not off , 1 ICBM whit 3 smaller warheads is still better then one gravity bomb whit larger warhead.
There is nothing to be proud of having these weapons nor engineering them. A perfect example of some countries obsession with suicidal self destruction.
@@jasonrist6582 Maybe. But then we can always upload later, assuming we survive. There are 8 billion people, figure half will die but... not before taking pictures. Imagine the royalty-free opportunities of those who survive. Even if 3/4 were to die, that would probably be OK as long as we got good video content, it was worth it.
Historically our species has improved itself through conflict… violent conflict; economic conflict; cultural conflict. The risk is becoming so good at the means that the ends no longer exist……. Wait.
@ Oh my God. They literally had God's power and could've demostrated it by destroying military targets, one after another, with overwhelming results. They DIDN'T EVEN TRY THAT. Keep pretending like the U.S. didn't specifically want to test those things out in an urban environment. But of course, a country that tested radiation poisoning on the indigenous population living in the Marshall Islands will always be nothing but heroic and honorable 🤮
@@teremin The two bombs killed between 100,000 and 150,000 people in the two cities. The fire bombing of Tokyo killed between 300k - 400k. Yes they definitely saved lives and prevented millions from dying.
As a Gen X, we grew up with this stuff as a fairly constant fear/threat. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were fresh in our parents and grandparents memories, and we all knew we desperately wanted to avoid nuclear war. Since then, I think memories have faded and movies and video games have even made a post atomic world seem exciting. The true horror of what we could be facing again in Russia/Ukraine and in the middle east seems to have been forgotten by people and politicians playing chicken with international rivalries.
We have developed an amazing capacity for self destruction. Our leaders have lost their collective moral compass. I'm sure none of us want to see anything like this happen.
Actually, that’s not how nuclear ballistic missiles work. A missile like the Minuteman III doesn’t just detonate over a city with all its warheads and the rocket body still intact. Here’s how it actually works: 1. The missile is made up of multiple rocket stages that fall away during ascent. By the time it reaches space, only the Post-Boost Vehicle (PBV) and its payload of warheads remain. 2. If it’s equipped with MIRVs (Multiple Independently Targetable Reentry Vehicles), the PBV maneuvers in space and releases each warhead on a separate trajectory, aimed at different targets. 3. The warheads re-enter the atmosphere independently and detonate at their assigned targets, often miles or even hundreds of miles apart. The idea that the missile would “explode with everything still inside it” is just plain wrong. It’s designed for precision, with each warhead reaching its target individually. For example, a Minuteman III could hit multiple cities or military sites in a single launch. The remaining parts of the missile either burn up or fall harmlessly back to Earth. Understanding this helps clarify why MIRVs are such a significant part of strategic deterrence-they allow a single missile to devastate multiple targets spread across a wide area.
What a strange game. The only winning move is to not play. How about a nice game of chess?
Great movie
WAR GAMES
Greetings professor Falken!
Would you like to play a game?
@garywilliams267 I love this. Have you ever played the game "Plauge Inc"?
"Man invented the nuclear bomb, but no mouse would make a mousetrap."
-Albert Einstein
@@Recht_voor_zijn_raap exactly, and people celebrate the idiot who invented the nuclear bomb. Possibly the only planet in the entire universe and we build bomb that could destroy it 🤦
Mice don't have thumbs, so they couldn't possibly make mouse traps. Given thumbs, we don't know wtf they'd do.....
@@dme1016you can still delete this comment, you know…
Did he actually say that because that’s dumb as fk
Mice also don't systematically murder, rape, or enslave other mice. Evil begets evil.
“All war is a symptom of man’s failure as a thinking animal” - John Steinbeck, never a truer phrase ever said.
It's government sanctioned and perpetrated genocide. -Me
Too bad that's not true at all.
@ how so?
@@DarrellW_UK Because it can be argued that the root of conflict is due to the fact that we ARE thinking creatures. Our individual minds all have different ideas, desires and morals yet they all must try to coexist within a fairly basic social structure that has limitations. Sometimes those differences in thoughts can be so opposed that there is no ability to negotiate a satisfactory outcome for each party. Your neighbor wants to have your family as their own. You dont want that to happen. How do you get a mutual satisfactory outcome from that, better yet WHY would you even want to try? If right now as you read this a random person just kicks in your door and says this place and all inside it is theirs now, would you try to negotiate a deal with them that would satisfy you both? Or would you try to defend your territory? Call the police? Wars are just that same basic problem just much higher on the social ladder. That isnt a "failure" of anything, its a side effect of being individual thinking creatures.
Damn skippy!
Imagine, just imagine if all the military spending of the world would be spent on space exploration and improving life world wide. Damn are we humans dumb and stupid.
Countries don't want to be invaded. That's basically the reason we still hold on to these things.
Yeah so Vlad or any bloodthirsty dictator could be invading 3 countries simultaneously not 1by 1. Just imagine 😅😅
They would just find a way to funnel that money to themselves and ship us all as slaves to the planets to continue their profits.
@@kamata066 It would not have been possible IF all nation had no military to attack others. Can't you see how it goes? One country gets the Atomic bomb the others want it. So if no one has it, it just does not lead others to have it. I am speaking about a world where greed, sneak, selfishness and so on does NOT exist. Basically humans have evolved to the point where they don't think of attacking each other but more work with each other. When you don't have factories that build tanks, when you don't have factories that don't build bombs then no one will have them. Maybe I am thinking way too much into the good world and where we are or WHO we are is evil and heartless.
This is what happens when you dont prioritize the Lord Jesus
Lots of new Nuke based content rolling into my feed. The algorithm is trying to tell me something
Nukes "R" us opening soon.
My thoughts exactly
.. that you - and people who watch things similar to you - have been watching a lot of these lately.
New Jersey.
@@hulkgqnissanpatrol6121 Did the Aliens decided to nuke from orbit instead of searching for inteligent life 🤔
I think casualties are being seriously underestimated.
Immediate casualties seem on point. Over the next few months and years, those numbers will skyrocket. What was once 1.5 million could easily surpass 5 million
Casualties will be literally every single person on earth
@waynereiffenstein7153 the "nuclear winter" theory has been disproven with new calculations it would take nearly every nuke we have on earth being used (unlikely since most aren't on ready alert), and all those bombs hitting its target (unlikely with missile defense). Humanity would live, society as it currently is, unlikely.
Of course they are. Just like everything else on the planet. It's all speculation.
Yeah well. Fallout will guarantee mutual destruction regardless. Its not limited to the fireball, shockwave or whatever else.
2 aliens are talking in outer space, looking down on Earth.
"It seems the inhabitants of planet Earth have created nuclear technology and missiles"
says one alien "are they showing signs of intelligence?" asks the other
"I dont think so. They seem to be aiming at themselves"
😂😂😂😂😂
I think they're looking down going "do you think they'll get through this part like we did?"
😂😂😂 love the dark humor… but it’s very true… suicidal
HA HA HA HA, Foolish Earthlings! -Kang and Kodos
@@sid2112 A random little girl just SCREAMED in your face!
Thought I would watch something cheerful on Christmas day.
The one silver lining is nobody can use them without killing themselves, in one way or another. As in the War Games movie, the only way to win this game is to not play it.
That movie assumes Russia’s nukes are all up to date and in working order.
Doesn't sound true
That presupposes rational people at the helm. That's not what I see... Fucking frightening that the lunatics have control of these weapons.
@@bravebeard6225 The original 5 are only likely to launch against each other, probably NATO vs Russia & China, either way there's a massive response. Israel, India and Pakistan only have beef with their neighbours, meaning radiation clouds blowing back over them. North Korea would either attack the US which means invasion from likely North and South, or would attack South Korea meaning radiation clouds again. There's no win to be had, they only make sense as an existential threat warning.
I just hope we never experience a Dr. Strangelove or 99 Luftballoons scenario.
I know it’s just a video, but I think it was kind of strange to choose Tokyo as a target.
maybe it was trying to be accurate and show a perspective of what they saw?
Also Beijing, New York, Washington DC... They are all likely target cities if this nightmare scenario comes to be.
Population density..trying to drive up casualty numbers.
How else do we get Godzilla?
Yes, choosing Tokyo was unrealistic. To reflect upcoming US foreign policy better, they should have chosen Ottowa or Copenhagen.
I used to be awed by the power of nuclear weapons but now I'm simply terrified. Should this civilization ending power be controlled by a few fragile and sometimes undependable leaders? I definitely don't want the fate of the entire world decided by events in Ukraine and other territorial disputes.
We should put such weapons under Sky net control and remove human fragility and decision making from control of these peace insururing weapons.
Well, we’ve had them for around 80 years now and they’ve only been used twice and the result was the ending of a war.
@imrich884 Even a small probability of them being used in any given year eventually adds up to a 100 % certainty that they'll be used. Unless they become seen as the vile 💩 they are, and our overlords catch up with us peasants and fall over themselves in their haste to clean this crap off the face of the earth.
I think you’re talking about Trump right?
Some leaders are wearing depends.
_"Si vis pacem, para bellum."_ If you want peace, prepare for war.
Ok maybe in Roman era, but these weapons are beyond necessary to destroy the entire planet.
@@carmgitto Mutually-Assured Destruction (MAD) worked during the 45 years of the Cold War, I don't see why it wouldn't work now. Nobody wants to launch a first strike.
"It's in your nature to destroy yourselves." --- T-800
Funny! I was literally thinking the exact same thing!
its a fact
Did you think that was a documentary?
Geniva convention: Shooting civilians during wartime is illegal.
Country with warheads: This nuke could kill up to 4.5 million civilians.
...including all of Geneva.
98% of all the ISIS fighters, the Sri Lanka government forces, Al Shabob, the Taliban, the Russians fighting in Ukraine and in other world conflicts have never heard of the "Geneva Conventions" or do not believe in them. They were worthless to both Japanese and German military's in WW II and was worthless in the 2 atomic bombs dropped on Japan.
The world need peace, not war.
BOOORRRRIIINNNGGGGG
Admirable, but naive.
We are not smart enough to think this way...
Si vis pacem, para bellum
"There's no money in peace" from a Three Stooges short
Despite the destruction, death and radiation. Theres something about a nuclear explosion thats captivating to watch.
The initial blinfing flash and mushroom cloud is fascinating. And then there's the massive, exciting fires that no one nearby will be left to see. And then there's just huge grey black radioactive dead wastelands, forever.
@@rain1956if that were true, no one would be living in Hiroshima or Nagasaki. Both cities are thriving.
@insideoutsideupsidedown2218 What was dropped on those 3 cities were very small compared to the magnitude of today's nuclear weapons. And there'd be a good chance of no rescue coming, due to multiple cities (and even countries) being hit.
@@rain1956 here comes debbie downer!
All that power from splitting or fusing atoms. It is pretty remarkable to think about.
I used to work on a missile fire crew for the United States Army. What never ceases to amaze me, is when people say things like “That’s why I’m glad I don’t live in a big city”, or “Maybe it’s safer to live in another country”, or stuff like that. What people are failing to understand is, if we have a nuclear war with another major country (like China or Russia), that would be the end of civilization. Let me make it crystal clear for anyone that doesn’t get the point - THAT MEANS THAT EVERYONE ON THIS PLANET WILL DIE!!!
I am betting there will be people who read this who still won’t get it! 🙄
well,,, no. People in south America will take over the Earth. Folks always forget about all the people down south.
How? pls explain. What about Africa & other non NATO countries?
Bs, not everyone on earth will die. Not even everyone in the countries directly involved will die.
I promise you that will NEVER happen!
@@daveyboy5416 well, so long as you promise, were safe
You spoke about Beijing and then showed the skyline of Pudong (downtown Shanghai) which is over 1,220 KM away.
Humanity has lost its mind .....
So what’s new?
Imagine multi million man armies marching, AGAIN.
Both are meat grinders.
We humans are the worst thing that could have ever hapen to this planet.
We ain’t all bad. Just most of us are.
Also the best…not all of human existence has been bad
It was made for us, in my opinion. I'm not getting into the "Is God real debate", just sayin.
The many catastrophic asteroids and floods in times past would disagree with you.
We live in such a disgusting place. And all for what?!? For money.
Sad.
money is no use to anyone if nuclear war breaks out. Food will be the only gold there will be.
Money? No. It's about power, control, fear, and showing the world who is more insecure.
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂🤣😜
You see the root of it.
Ordinary citizens will burn in the war. And those who start the war will sit in bunkers that are 3 times more impenetrable. That's why they can afford to play a risky game for money and influence.
Absolutely, no one wins. Not even the few unlucky souls who somehow survive because they were just outside of ground zero. I can't even imagine the true horror of a post-full-scale nuclear war world.
Complete idiocy.
My thoughts exactly
Such a waste of money too aye
We are not scared, Russians should be
All countries are idiots then.
Says the free people
we are fucked if they use any of these in the future.
it is improbable but we dont know the future aka our destiny
@mattburrito won't find out till it's too late anyway
This video stands out as the first to thoroughly explain the strategic advantage of MIRVs, showcasing how they can effectively maximize destruction across a wider area while remaining more cost-efficient compared to deploying larger, single warheads. It provides a deeper understanding of the balance between military efficiency and destructive capability in modern nuclear strategy.
Thank you for your comment!
With population density far greater than that of the cold war the immediate death toll of a lower yield MIRV today supercedes that of a single larger yield in the 70's. As you say it showcases the change in strategy.
@@develynseether4426 i agree. tho i wish some of these videos would show what an 8 MIRV strike would look like across a major city. they only show one hit explaining the single impact. i have yet to see one that shows the full payload.
Except MIRVs are quite a bit more expensive, not just on their own to construct and maintain, but the systems that guide and deliver them. One can reasonably say that the benefits of MIRVs outweigh the increased costs, but it's important to note that this does not mean they're less expensive. Any "cost-efficiency" of note is only relevant if they're ever deployed.
This is why the Space Force type program is so crucial. Intercepting an ICBM is one thing, getting ahead of a hypersonic device is really only viable from space at this point but to Intercept an entire group of warheads is extremely difficult.
Space is fake
To don't cancel every treaty with the russians federation, would have been more crucial.
@danielapel1976 eh?
dont know man, seem it will break rule to not install weapon in space
so i can see china+russia installing their nuke in orbit
also space defense doesnt really help against nuclear cruise missile or hypersonic missile
and you can predict satellite orbit, so if i am china+russia i will invest to jamming satellite with laser or micro wave beam
Currently, the ABM systems are still in testing, and are only 50% effective. Closure rates are over 20 thousand miles an hour in space between the interceptor and the "target." Its like shooting a built with another built that's been fired from the other side of the planet. Considering the distances, curvature of the earth, possible flight paths of the missiles, the number of warheads and spoofs, and time to engage, it's almost an impossible task to create an effective ABM system, especially when the enemy can just overwhelm it. They would need thousands of ABMs just to hit half of the incoming targets. The costs, the geographical requirements for an effective system, the decision times needed for our politicians to decide what to the do, with only minutes to spare, I don't see it really happening. I think all we can do is make sure the other guy knows he's toast if he pops off one of those things.
As for hypersonics, honestly, they're not really that big of a deal. Current systems just need better ROE (rules of engagement), but the computing power is already there. See missile, track/plot, then prosecute. The human just needs to know that its ok to fire BEFORE the hypersonic is detected.
ICBM's and sub launched ICBM's are actually harder to engage, and come in faster than hypersonics. So, like an ABM system, I just think hypersonics are a waste of money.
They always talk about the blast but never about the resulting ash clouds. They have no idea or even ways to measure that.
The real danger after a nuclear clash would be the dozens of nuclear power plants left unattended, melting down...possibly resulting in dozens of Fukashimas.
Yeah we do. We have weather pattern projections of travelling radiation from predicted jet stream movements. Radiation is not nearly is large of a threat from nukes as people think. Blasts definitely kill more.
@@Viper31300 you can only predict where the wind will take things. You don’t know how much ash trees, people, animals, buildings etc. make after such a blast. How long it will stay in the atmosphere, where it will land, what effect it will have on the ocean, the cooling effect? Again, you have no idea.
@@ace1776 I have a decent idea. It is possible to try and estimate. Wouldn’t be perfect, but projections have been made before about that stuff. The issue is, there’s not much of a point in trying to account for all of that. Blasts are a lot more deadly in terms of our modern weapons and doctrines for using nukes in combat.
@@Viper31300 depend type of nuke and what they nuke
if they use cobalt nuke the bomb will be very radioactive and also i dont exclude move like nuking opponant nuclear power plant to turn multi ton of radioactive in nuclear power plant into nuclear dust cloud in stratosphere
To use these weapons is total insanity. We need to figure out how to all get along.
Easy to kill, hard to have peace. Greed, money governments working for themselves . Nothing has changed since humans evolved into intelligent beings. The world has to have one government that works for all the peoples of earth.
humanity hasn’t evolved in intelligence physically and mentally yet we are a type 0 civilization
the military people that saw the nuclear bomb test said there was a purple color, that they could even see it through their hands and eye lids. None of the nuclear bomb videos ever seem to show that part
America and Russia have been playing silly buggers for decades and gave spent a fortune doing so. Imagine if they had just agreed to ignore each other, how much money would they have saved? Trillions $.
If, this happens we’ll be back to the stone age.
People are actually proud of designing and building that? That's depressing.
🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂
I posted a suggestion for how to prevent this kind of thing. A RUclips administrator deleted it and I received a popup message warning me with account suspension if I posted it again.
So let's not talk about peace.. 😂😂😂
RUclips censorship is bs as usual! 🤦🏻👎
Wonder why...?
@@DavePerez-dk4ge Because my idea was obviously opposed to his or her political sensibilities.
@@DavePerez-dk4ge I answered, and I see that reply is gone. Alright.
I'm wondering what the Trident missile would be like if they used all eight warheads on one target?
May dig a whole to earths core
And our species want to explore and colonize mars?! For what? We’re so invested in creating mass destruction on our own planet.
thats sad and lack of care for nature we should create arcologies for humanity and nature not a row of bombs destroying everything
It is human nature to want more resources and territory...... There is an unlimited amount in space to satisfy all appetites without any necessity for conflict..... The latter lends itself to common sense as a better choice...... In my opinion......
I though this was gonna be a second by second, minute by minute video. Like a quick streak, screen goes white, the fireball/mushroom slowly becomes visible, a thunderous boom and roar 15 or so seconds later… ya know
The scary thing is that AI maybe able to launch them in the future. Pray for the safe use of AI.
7:20 this is the first time any video properly explained the correct use of MIRV to clobber a far wider area of destruction that using a more expensive and huge warheads.
Thank you for watching!
MIRVs are more expensive to build than a single large warhead. Yes MIRVs do more damage, but they aren't cheaper.
it is also to neutralize anti missile defense
Do you have any advice on what factor sun cream we need to use, or is it just duck and cover?
🤣🤣🤣
I think Sarah Conner said 1 Million SPF.
@@yetti423 You should be able to cover up with a newspaper. That's what I learned from bert the turtle.
@@Piano218-zzz Don't forget the picnic blanket.
They sure are preparing everybody for the inevitable
Keep everyone frightened believing it’s inevitable- yes.
Why do nukes going off in war cause all of these horrible environmental effects but letting them off for testing doesn't?
Controlled environment. Careful planning "like weather patterns etc". Geographical choices. And the fact that dozens if not hundreds weren't detonated all at once during testing. Not to mention there actually are measurable environmental effects from the tests, also plenty of soldiers have died of cancer after witnessing and or being involved in said test.
Also to note in the controlled tests the payload was way smaller giving them the ability to calculate the damage if a larger payload would be used for a higher yield effect
Bold to presume there weren’t effects. They were just more isolated.
@@deoradh How is that a bold question haha. I guess it is bold to ask question around some people. So bold, sticking my neck out wondering about an obvious question as to how our lifestyles are more of a threat to the environment than setting of thousands of nuke tests. I haven't seen really anything from the environmentalists regarding these test. Based on the description of nuclear war surely even one test would and has done very serious damage to the planet?
Most tests were done in the past underground or underwater. There’s a treaty I believe on testing now and most testing is calculated on supercomputers.
"decimate" does not have the meaning that most people use it to mean. Literally, it is a destruction of 10% of enemy forces.
Sadly, there is only one group of people who thinks this can be a win win
Pizza delivery drivers?
@ good guess. If you are a Harris supporter
Right wing so called 'Christian' Republicans and other nutters..
God's chosen people. The Chews!
Small hat
@6:20 Japan: The hell did I do now!? No touch Boat swear!
LOL... I thought the same thing. Retaliation for Sony's DRM, perhaps? 😏
😂😂😂 out of all the comments I was seeing this stuck out to me the most hahah
Fact check. The Minuteman missile shown is actually the older non MIRV MinuteMan II with a single re-entry vehicle.
2:24 That's not Beijing, that's Shanghai...
The real danger after a nuclear clash would be the dozens of nuclear power plants left unattended, melting down...possibly resulting in dozens of Fukashimas.
Programmed to shut down safely in the event of catastrophe. Hopefully!
For a country that prouds itself on delivering freedom, you sure are full of people talking about delivering weapons of mass destruction.
Good video but I fundamentally disagree with the reference at the end to a "global effort for disarmament" being critical to preserving peace. The fact that world powers have these weapons has been the single biggest factor preventing a third world war breaking out, because the consequences are simply too high to ignore. Nuclear disarmament would put humanity at greater risk, perversely.
You're confusing peace with quiet... And worse, you're spitting out propaganda that was meant to condition you to this insane reality. Think about it: which is worse? Global powers spending another massive and pointless effort style WWI until our insane leaders are tired of bloodshed, or a nuclear Holocaust? In the first case, once this insane theater of war is over we can rebuild like post WWI. In the 2nd option though, several mentally unhinged numnuts are holding the entire world hostage with their finger on the red button. There's no rebuilding after such war.
Also, this doesn't even consider the catastrophic mistake event which humanity has already been near multiple time (Google the incident when our early warning defense system mistaken glare reflecting from clouds for a first strike...).
Again, there's no rebuilding in case of an all out nuclear war between super powers. There won't be life left on this planet, and whatever humans survive this apocalypse won't be able to rebuild for tens of thousands of years post this event.
This entire insane setup only to secure economic resources and for a handful of megalomaniacs to stroke their ego.
Albert Einstein said: "Man invented the nuclear bomb, but no mouse would make a mousetrap."
We are an evil, insane species, controlled by even bigger insane numtuns. The Zoo Hypothesis is a god damn fact.
Just got to hope the world powers are reasonable and intelligent people. Yeah we're doomed.
Using Nuclear bomb in war means nothing but doom of humanity
It means resetting society, not necessarily ending civilization.
Wounded? It's not like there'll be ambulances and hospitals for the wounded.
I’ll be ordering dominos.
Imagine the view from the ISS.
An armed society is a polite society.
1:23 typically? It's never been "delivered", so "typically" is not an appropriate word here
The numbers are a mess throughout this video. For example at 7:10 the text says 8km2, the narrator says 8km radius. These are two completely different numbers!
Yep, I quit watching for that reason alone. It’s just made-up data.
It’s not about size… it’s the motion of the ocean
Well, merry frakin' christmas.
Crazy world we live in i understand the need for deference strength through superior firepower but to actually be living in a world where the misses start flying is a terrifying concept to contemplate nowadays
This is why you might as well enjoy your life to the fullest now because you never know what tomorrow will bring.
The first bomb had a bigger payload but the blast was smaller than the other ones with a smaller payload. I think your Americans bomb stats are mixed up.
He used radius in miles for the first bomb and radius in kilometers for the second, 4 miles is larger radius then 5 kilometers, i guess he did not pay attention to details 🤣, but his ranking is not off , 1 ICBM whit 3 smaller warheads is still better then one gravity bomb whit larger warhead.
He constantly mixes km2 area and km radius throughout the video.
first bomb was 20 kt
average nuke are in 400 kt
Like it actually matters.
The rendering is of a Minuteman I or II, not a Minuteman III as stated.
There is nothing to be proud of having these weapons nor engineering them. A perfect example of some countries obsession with suicidal self destruction.
Nowadays not having nukes is suicidal :)
One nice thing about nuclear war: it will allow new and unique video content.
Assuming you survive,
you'd be very lucky to be able to watch a Puppet Show heh
noone will be able to upload the videos without infrastructure. the government would shut down public access to the internet anyway
@@jasonrist6582 Maybe. But then we can always upload later, assuming we survive. There are 8 billion people, figure half will die but... not before taking pictures. Imagine the royalty-free opportunities of those who survive. Even if 3/4 were to die, that would probably be OK as long as we got good video content, it was worth it.
lol. A nuclear war would wipe out most electricity. Allowing for 0 video content.
Spotlight prepares us for what is coming? how quaint.
Forget about gravity bombs and parachutes, those B-52s have been converted with rotary cruise missile launchers for decades now.
Sticks and stone bro, sticks and stones.
The weapons of ww4...
of course we be living in the stone age if this stupid shit happen
GOD HELP US if we ever use these!
What's the point in ruling a nuclear wasteland. Man, we are so stupid as a species.
This makes me sick!
Stopped at 0:30 when the graphic misspelled “diameter.”
What a petty reason to stop. You must be an incredibly intolerant person.
@ Why should I give any credibility to someone who can’t be bothered to have accuracy in their communication alone?
Yeah, no.
@@Dawgator A spelling error?
You, my fellow, are missing out on a lot of information due to your arrogance
Uhh the graphic didn't spell it.... The guy who made the video did.... Ffs...
We’ve had thermo nukes for around 70 years. It’s a miracle that we haven’t had a nuclear war yet. I’m sure eventually it will happen.
minuteman and trident reach mach 23, The US has had hypersonic missiles since the 1950s
Historically our species has improved itself through conflict… violent conflict; economic conflict; cultural conflict. The risk is becoming so good at the means that the ends no longer exist……. Wait.
Video: (in nonchalant tone) "Now watch how USA can nuke a foreign metropolis."
This is a first impression.
Should they show USA nuking itself?? Don't be so sensitive. Besides, there are examples of the USA getting nuked by other countries.
The sad part. They are willing to use them.
Even though they might not even survive themselves.
And we are supposed to be intelligent.
You are living proof of that.
@ 6 words and you needed to edit. Oh the irony 😂
The missile said to be the Minuteman III is from the silhouette/drawing they provide actually the earlier Minuteman II.
Great video however im not sure if im experiencing Deja Vu, I've seen this video over a month ago. i believe...
Most of the doctors EMT's would be dead and likely all the hospitals destroyed if this happened.
it’s basically all life on earth will be gone
Assuring the b52 can penetrate heavily defended airspace?...wasn't a lot of b52's shot down even in vietnam?
B2
@@Mrbimmer11 +cruise missile
I think it’s really cool that we’re all suddenly being recommended videos about nuclear war…
TIL: A 68 Mustang is a compact car.
I came to make sure I wasnt the only one.
Almost identical dimensions as a '23 Corolla.
Dr. Zaius was right in his assessment of man. He was the real hero of Planet of the Apes.
Its a weird weapon. The first time they were used, they ended up saving lives. It has never been used again and I hope we never do.
Saving lives... depends on who you ask, I guess :D
@@tereminhow about the people that actually had to fight and understood the Japanese fighting spirit
@ Oh my God. They literally had God's power and could've demostrated it by destroying military targets, one after another, with overwhelming results. They DIDN'T EVEN TRY THAT. Keep pretending like the U.S. didn't specifically want to test those things out in an urban environment. But of course, a country that tested radiation poisoning on the indigenous population living in the Marshall Islands will always be nothing but heroic and honorable 🤮
@@teremin The two bombs killed between 100,000 and 150,000 people in the two cities. The fire bombing of Tokyo killed between 300k - 400k. Yes they definitely saved lives and prevented millions from dying.
@@teremin Learn something
As I saw on a bumper sticker back in the 80s:
"Nuclear war doesn't determine who's RIGHT - only who's LEFT."
Merry Christmas to you and your family! 🌲🌲
So you had to remind Japan about being attacked by a nuclear weapon? Wow.
Why T.F. would Tokyo be targeted ? ! ? ! SHTOOPID. !
Yeah, I thought it was bad form on the video creators to use a city in Japan as an example .. considering history and all.
@@Entropy_Wins_4476 bad form? it's just a reminder to never touch the USA's boats. We have even bigger suns to drop
Hypotheticals. using greatly populated areas as examples.
I was wondering why they didn't show any US or European cities being nuked.
In case they thought we were sorry.
As a Gen X, we grew up with this stuff as a fairly constant fear/threat. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were fresh in our parents and grandparents memories, and we all knew we desperately wanted to avoid nuclear war. Since then, I think memories have faded and movies and video games have even made a post atomic world seem exciting. The true horror of what we could be facing again in Russia/Ukraine and in the middle east seems to have been forgotten by people and politicians playing chicken with international rivalries.
It's ridiculous...no person or persons should have the capacity to destroy all life.....sad truly sad
.
..
concrete basement one or more stories underground, you can survive above ground after about two weeks, question is, would you want to?
@@jasonrist6582 One or two stories underground aint enough. But yes, if you live, the radiation goes away and settles after a week or two.
Life would recover. I mean, the Earth has been through far worse catastrophes. Civilization might not, though.
It’s pretty wild how the B-83 yield is that devastating yet the actual size of a bomb is smaller than a car, like what in the actual hell.. 🤯
@4:30. Black Mesa scientist.
Anything parachute assisted is pretty much obsolete now that missile defence is around
This video is almost verbatim a copy of the video Science Time did about a month or two ago…. Same graphics, info, etc.
Was thinking the same thing
We have developed an amazing capacity for self destruction. Our leaders have lost their collective moral compass. I'm sure none of us want to see anything like this happen.
It doesn't matter what we want. It's all down to those at the top. If they want to end the world we have no say in the matter.
How to get lots an lots of cheap Chinese glass arnoments
The Tzar bomb was so powerful much of the destruction was wasted by blasting space.
"Deterrent strategy" - GET. RID. OF. THAT. SHIT.
Sticks and stones?
Explosive stick colliding 2 radio active stones.
Who knew sticks and stones would be the most powerful weapon lmfao
Actually, that’s not how nuclear ballistic missiles work. A missile like the Minuteman III doesn’t just detonate over a city with all its warheads and the rocket body still intact. Here’s how it actually works:
1. The missile is made up of multiple rocket stages that fall away during ascent. By the time it reaches space, only the Post-Boost Vehicle (PBV) and its payload of warheads remain.
2. If it’s equipped with MIRVs (Multiple Independently Targetable Reentry Vehicles), the PBV maneuvers in space and releases each warhead on a separate trajectory, aimed at different targets.
3. The warheads re-enter the atmosphere independently and detonate at their assigned targets, often miles or even hundreds of miles apart.
The idea that the missile would “explode with everything still inside it” is just plain wrong. It’s designed for precision, with each warhead reaching its target individually. For example, a Minuteman III could hit multiple cities or military sites in a single launch. The remaining parts of the missile either burn up or fall harmlessly back to Earth.
Understanding this helps clarify why MIRVs are such a significant part of strategic deterrence-they allow a single missile to devastate multiple targets spread across a wide area.
B52 doesn't carry the B83
Hell no 2 seagulls do 🤣🤣🤣
B2 DOES
@Mrbimmer11 no b1b lancer carries nuclear payload
Idk why these keep popping up on my feed, but i keep tapping in
We all want to know how it's going to end.