Shame we don't just glass the entire continent and never hear about this garbage again.
Just glass the whole Asia bro 
But I thought Kamala said there's no US troops in war zones ???????
If this happened in 2020 you clowns would be crying in the streets asking for de-escalation.
But instead you blindly fall behind someone who tells you "The us has no troops in combat zones"
This is obviously a lie. Kamala Harris told us there are no US troops in any war zones.
Smartest chuds 
So they're trying to kill some ISIS to justify leaving syria and iraq. This administration is going to lie the pants off of us. It is going to be worse than afghanistan
More chuddies 
If this happened in 2020, Trump would be calling it our most important victory since we lost the civil war.
Ugh trump this trump that
Things may much better in this regard in a couple of months.
Naw, you'll probably find a way to shoe horn him in, any chance you get, for the next four years.
Weird how we conduct air strikes on a country we are not at war with and who never asked us to be there.
We do what we want
How many conflicts is the USA blowing people up in at the moment?
Who knows what to believe anymore. "Terrorist" is a word so easily thrown around nowadays.
LOL! All these pro war bots repeating themselves. Making it too obvious.
Congratulations, our country bombs anyone they consider a "terrorist" how do we know innocent lives weren't ended? Because the article said so?
Any real person who is ignorant enough to believe these PLEASE look into all the wars the US has started the past 70 years and ask yourself, are we genuinely the good guys? Are we actually taking out "terrorists"?
Or… are we furthering the agenda of the most powerful people in the world.
Mmmm terrorist tears 
.webp?h=8 "Merry Fistmas!")
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Doesn't America have thousands of nukes?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Yeah. But still not enough. Even if Russia/us launched all our nukes at once it would only kill something like 20% of our respective populations.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I call bullshit on that. 20% of the U.S is about 70M people.
Detonating one W-78 warhead in the center of New-York would kill 1M people and injure 2M.
There are 400 deployed W78, and between 2000 and 4000 deployed warheads total in the U.S.
So to reach only 20% you have to assume 98% of the warheads will fail to reach the major cities for some reason. Also that the collapse of the grid, healthcare, food distribution won't kill massive amounts past the initial strikes.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Yeah that's definitely in the range of estimates. Nukes wouldn't be targeting to kill maximal amount of people. They would be direct first at military sites. cities with heavy military presence might get dozens of nukes while others will be left untouched.
https://www.icanw.org/new_study_on_us_russia_nuclear_war
Not sure I completely buy into the nuclear winter theory. I think sources are conflicted on that matter. I've seen extrapolations from Dresden but the majority of nukes launched would be airburst and not ground burst (not that there wouldn't be ground burst attacks against hardened bunkers like the Cheyenne mountain or russia's equivalent).
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I was browsing Wikipedia the other day and saw this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don-2N_radar
Imagine being some dude stationed there and seeing 70 nukes headed directly for you
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Excellent example of military targets that would "soak up" nukes away from cities. Although that one is pretty close to Moscow.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Não conheço, me vermelho-pilula nesse filme
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
O melhor filme sobre um apocalípse nuclear já feito, é meio datado mas ainda é muito bom (eu não assisti tudo, por isso eu queria assistir ele aqui junto com os meus dramanautas!
)
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
!kino
@WayOut streaming today at 9:00 pm ET
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
I guess I was third-best.
But we had a bunch of pamphlets and books in other languages. (Foreshadowing)
One thing I noticed about the articles and conjugation as I visited the south was that the southern dialects would say "o" instead of "il." Etc.
The song "O Sole Mio" isn't in proper Italian. Its basically the American hillbilly version of actual Italian.
So you can ping the macacos on this part.
We had some pamphlets and books which I thought were in southern dialect, but when I tried to read them I realized I was wrong. They were in Pocho.
I bought more Latin books I learned more.
Did you know that the Latin infinitive "go" is "ire" but in Italian it's "andare" yet the Napoli dialect retains it as "jire" -- pronounced almost the same?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Lots of italian immigrants fled from Italy before the unification happenend, so they spoke their local italian dialects, not the standard italian that came later.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
The mass Italian migration in Brazil began in 1874, in the US it started in the 1880s, so post-unification however the dialects were still spoken and dominant until the mid-20th century.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Italy even made a soap opera about eye-talians who fled to South America.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Ima try to cis-late this from my meager understanding.
"the better film resembles a nuclear apocalypse already done, and" > "most of the movie seems likes it's set in a post-apocalyptic world and"
"and my [gift?] most [ainda idk] is very [good?]"
"for this is what got us to here along with that of my dramanauts!"
Sorry I don't speak pocho
Google said:
I give myself either an F+ or a D-
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
!macacos
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
I'm doing a lernding!
This isn't "the better film." It means "the best film."
I should have seen this as a 3rd person subjunctive present tense. In Italian "sarebbe" -- "would be."
I'm struggling because there isn't any preposition here.
um peru de peru di peru
I'm still sticking with "a nuclear apocalypse already done/made" if "já" means "already" and "feito" is a past participle of "to do/make,."
"é" is third person "to be" so "it is"
I guess this is related to "minus" and not first person possessive. "Poquito" or "poco."
I'll figure out the rest tomorrow.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Do you realize how r-slurred you sound extrapolating from a nuke on NYC as a weapon efficiency rate for a continent?
"Premise: I will use the greatest outlier on the continent as my assumed rate."
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I didn't know if was your highest density city, I just picked a random big city. Either way, pick any state capital or major metropolis and you'll get the same results, you fat r-slurred c*nt.
Boston 500K, San Fran 400K, Washington 400K. So you need 140 warheads rather than 70, that's 96% expected failure rate rather than 98%, big whoop.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Requiring twice the efficiency rate is not, in fact, a negligible adjustment to your calculations. We know very little about the expected effectiveness of any hydrogen bomb ICBMs, especially the Russian ones.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Wrong.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
There are 336 cities with over 100k inhabitants, with a total population of ~100M people. Russia could nuke all of those, they'd die quickly, Most of the others would die within a few weeks.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Look, I'm not saying we should toy with the possibility, but you have far more confidence in their arsenal than I do. They don't even keep tires maintained on the equipment they're not actively using.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Most nukes arent for cities but military targets. A nuclear exchange is primarily about reducing the number of nukes and delivery methods of nukes your opponent has.
Almost all of them will go towards military targets.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Nuking the three gorges dam at the right time would kill like 300 million Chinese via flooding
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Fair. But only the Chinese would build something that could wipe out 1/5th of their population if it ever failed.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Enough for entire middle east and egypt
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context