America would win WW3

[Deleted member 6128]

If World War 3 were to breakout with Nukes



America and China would survive

China would significantly have the most casualties.

China would literally collapse, China has a horrendous track record with wars.

Russia is a shithole have no idea how people see it as a contender to be a superpower. A single Nuke in Moscow and St Petersburg absolutely collapses Russia.

Not to mention that Russia at this point would be fighting the entirety of Europe apart from maybe Serbia and Belarus.

If WW3 happened Russia would indefinitely collapse so would the UK, Germany and France.

America and NATO are still on top.

 

[Deleted member 21712]

Some other country would start it, but then the Americans would swoop in with their superior height and massive cocks and save the world

 

[British Incel]

My favourite cope from Ruskis is saying they will nuke the UK first as if our nuclear subs won't rise out of the North Atlantic/ Baltic/ Arctic seas and level every Russian city west of the Urals 20 mins later

 

[BrendioEEE]

You're never gonna make it if you still think Nuclear Bombs are real in 2023.

 

[Deleted member 27224]

You're never gonna make it if you still think Nuclear Bombs are real in 2023.

radiation is fake but bombs are real

 

[BrendioEEE]

radiation is fake but bombs are real

It's literally the opposite

 

[Deleted member 26116]

You're never gonna make it if you still think Nuclear Bombs are real in 2023.

Why are they not real? (Note: Not denying it, just genuinely curious).

 

[BrendioEEE]

Why are they not real? (Note: Not denying it, just genuinely curious).

The Tl;dr version is basically that nuclear bombs as a concept were just created as yet another in a long list of fake fear tactics to subdue and control a population.

What about Hiroshima and Nagasaki you might ask? It was bombed with an experimental firebomb weapon, but it was not a nuclear bomb, with a nuclear explosion, at ground zero of both Hiroshima and Nagasaki, stone buildings that should have been turned to dust, remained standing, only wooden buildings burned down completely. There is no evidence of instant vaporization from an airblast or heat.

Nuclear energy is real, safer than they let on, and we should be able to have our own personal nuclear generator in our home, making nuclear energy and nuclear materials seem dangerous is another way of preventing us from having personal, cheap, and affordable alternative energy weapons.

Radiation does exist and is dangerous at high levels, but there is no evidence of an actual Nuclear Explosion happening from a Nuclear Bomb.

 

[Deleted member 6128]

The Tl;dr version is basically that nuclear bombs as a concept were just created as yet another in a long list of fake fear tactics to subdue and control a population.

What about Hiroshima and Nagasaki you might ask? It was bombed with an experimental firebomb weapon, but it was not a nuclear bomb, with a nuclear explosion, at ground zero of both Hiroshima and Nagasaki, stone buildings that should have been turned to dust, remained standing, only wooden buildings burned down completely. There is no evidence of instant vaporization from an airblast or heat.

Nuclear energy is real, safer than they let on, and we should be able to have our own personal nuclear generator in our home, making nuclear energy and nuclear materials seem dangerous is another way of preventing us from having personal, cheap, and affordable alternative energy weapons.

Radiation does exist and is dangerous at high levels, but there is no evidence of an actual Nuclear Explosion happening from a Nuclear Bomb.

What about the bombs russia tested

Ye I doubt they're nuclear and the radiation is real

 

[Daqirius]

The Tl;dr version is basically that nuclear bombs as a concept were just created as yet another in a long list of fake fear tactics to subdue and control a population.

What about Hiroshima and Nagasaki you might ask? It was bombed with an experimental firebomb weapon, but it was not a nuclear bomb, with a nuclear explosion, at ground zero of both Hiroshima and Nagasaki, stone buildings that should have been turned to dust, remained standing, only wooden buildings burned down completely. There is no evidence of instant vaporization from an airblast or heat.

Nuclear energy is real, safer than they let on, and we should be able to have our own personal nuclear generator in our home, making nuclear energy and nuclear materials seem dangerous is another way of preventing us from having personal, cheap, and affordable alternative energy weapons.

Radiation does exist and is dangerous at high levels, but there is no evidence of an actual Nuclear Explosion happening from a Nuclear Bomb.

 

[Deleted member 17531]

The Tl;dr version is basically that nuclear bombs as a concept were just created as yet another in a long list of fake fear tactics to subdue and control a population.

What about Hiroshima and Nagasaki you might ask? It was bombed with an experimental firebomb weapon, but it was not a nuclear bomb, with a nuclear explosion, at ground zero of both Hiroshima and Nagasaki, stone buildings that should have been turned to dust, remained standing, only wooden buildings burned down completely. There is no evidence of instant vaporization from an airblast or heat.

Nuclear energy is real, safer than they let on, and we should be able to have our own personal nuclear generator in our home, making nuclear energy and nuclear materials seem dangerous is another way of preventing us from having personal, cheap, and affordable alternative energy weapons.

Radiation does exist and is dangerous at high levels, but there is no evidence of an actual Nuclear Explosion happening from a Nuclear Bomb.

interesting
link me some articles pertaining to this

 

[ifyouwannabemylover]

america is the most op nation in the history of humanity

 

[Deleted member 26116]

The Tl;dr version is basically that nuclear bombs as a concept were just created as yet another in a long list of fake fear tactics to subdue and control a population.

What about Hiroshima and Nagasaki you might ask? It was bombed with an experimental firebomb weapon, but it was not a nuclear bomb, with a nuclear explosion, at ground zero of both Hiroshima and Nagasaki, stone buildings that should have been turned to dust, remained standing, only wooden buildings burned down completely. There is no evidence of instant vaporization from an airblast or heat.

Nuclear energy is real, safer than they let on, and we should be able to have our own personal nuclear generator in our home, making nuclear energy and nuclear materials seem dangerous is another way of preventing us from having personal, cheap, and affordable alternative energy weapons.

Radiation does exist and is dangerous at high levels, but there is no evidence of an actual Nuclear Explosion happening from a Nuclear Bomb.

Eye-opening. This explanation made sense, at least to me. And it's quite easy to see why (((they))) would lie to us about nuclear bombs. Not gonna lie, I used to fear nuclear bombs as well as the whole talk about WW3 destroying the whole world because of these bombs, but now that I'm more skeptical about it I fear less fearful. Thank you for taking the time to reply.

 

[BrendioEEE]

Eye-opening. This explanation made sense, at least to me. And it's quite easy to see why (((they))) would lie to us about nuclear bombs. Not gonna lie, I used to fear nuclear bombs as well as the whole talk about WW3 destroying the whole world because of these bombs, but now that I'm more skeptical about it I fear less fearful. Thank you for taking the time to reply.

Yeah, some people asked for proof and such, but I don't have much squared away in regards to this subject in particularly bookmarked/saved/sorted. Even when I tried to check the youtube videos/infodumps I could easily search for and find on this subject just today, the videos/infodumps have been removed which is quite odd.

I would look into it yourself though if you find the time, maybe even engage in this kind of discussion or search around 4chan.

Main topics/subjects I would look into in regards to this are:
Hiroshima/Nagasaki Stone/Metal Buildings still standing at ground zero.

Nuclear Energy being safer than we're being let on/man who has eaten Uranium/Plutonium.

Nuclear Bombs do not exist.

Now with that all being said, powerful weapons, really fucked up ones do exist, just not these, nor are they as abundant as they claim nuclear bombs to be.

I know things most people just simply do not.

 

[Deleted member 21598]

The Tl;dr version is basically that nuclear bombs as a concept were just created as yet another in a long list of fake fear tactics to subdue and control a population.

What about Hiroshima and Nagasaki you might ask? It was bombed with an experimental firebomb weapon, but it was not a nuclear bomb, with a nuclear explosion, at ground zero of both Hiroshima and Nagasaki, stone buildings that should have been turned to dust, remained standing, only wooden buildings burned down completely. There is no evidence of instant vaporization from an airblast or heat.

Nuclear energy is real, safer than they let on, and we should be able to have our own personal nuclear generator in our home, making nuclear energy and nuclear materials seem dangerous is another way of preventing us from having personal, cheap, and affordable alternative energy weapons.

Radiation does exist and is dangerous at high levels, but there is no evidence of an actual Nuclear Explosion happening from a Nuclear Bomb.

Earth is also flat, 9/11 was an inside job, moon landing never happened, etc etc

Low IQ retard

 

[Deleted member 26116]

I know things most people just simply do not.

I know that feel.