In case of war...limited exchange or full scale...wich is most probably?

As far as I know, limited nuclear exchange is the most likely scenario. There would be no reason to attempt a full-scale attack. A full-scale attack would insure mutual destruction.

Damage from the initial blast would be confined to the areas directly targeted. However, nuclear fallout would be more widespread and depends on several factors such as wind, surrounding mountains, etc.

Just a single detonation in a major US city would cause worldwide panic, riots and financial meltdown.

I'm not sure how accurate your statement is. Initially, people will be shocked. However, I do not remember reading about worldwide panic, riots, or financial meltdown when the US nuked Japan in 1945.

thats becuase not everything was backed by the us dollar

Right. And things were a lot different then.
Japan had no way to hit back with nukes.
Now, if the US gets hit, nuke alert status worldwide will go into overdrive, the US is guaranteed to retaliate, plus panic buying, market instability, etc, etc...

I think you are combining two different posts into one. The post I replied to stated that a SINGLE nuclear detonation would cause panic, etc. How exactly is this panic supposed to take place? Are people going to start running around like a chicken with its head cut off? I don't think so. Humans are a lot more resilient than that.

Limited exchange no way. Both side will respond with full force once they see incoming ICBMs in their radars.

My guess...limited tactical nuke exchange. Keeping it regional. Then our idiot brokers a 7 year peace treaty. Which he breaks in 2016 in order to stay on as dictator. And then we'll see an icbm exchange. And USA finally loses to China, Russia and a bunch of other countries. Pretty hard to win when your bankrupt.....

Way I see it is that there are sleeper cells throughout the US with some of those missing Russian suitcase nukes and what ever bio agents they have their hands on.

If there is a limited nuke attack by any western force then we in the US, specially along our long and unprotected border, we are truly f*#ked!!!

Military generals in charge at NORAD are just a little more disciplined than that.

The big question, will China and Russia really get involved or back down at the last second?

Lol....U is silly

Likely starting conventional the rapidly escalating to full scale nuclear strikes untill one or both parties can no longer continue the engagement.

They are both communtist states and they see the United states as the new Nazi Germany who are going from country to country invading and ovethrowing governments around the world and the rest of the world who aren't U.S. allies want it to stop.
They have drawn the line in the sand with Iran.

Fear, people alive and moving around in fear will be the goal. Use instant information to its best. Avoid all engagements on either side till everything is in place.

EMP over the midwest to cripple the US power system and transportation. Why wreck the land and assets that you may end up owning.

juat a single hit on the usa or any of its interests would be the end of civilization when the bombs stop dropping in retaliation !

In the prelude to WW2 (the interwar years) the main fear was that the next total all out war would be devastating and quick.

The reason they thought it would run like that was due to the notion that the "bomber would always get through" and that those bombers would be using WMDs to wipe out each other population/industrial centers.

This mutual fear of destruction is more akin to our notion of MAD than anything else, and as our media presents us with SCIF scenes how nuclear war will know us back into the dark ages so did they in the 1930s (see HG Wells Scifi book/movie "Things to come" 1931 for example)

In reality that notion was negated on the one hand by reluctance of leaders to drop WMDs due to a fear of retaliation, and on the other by the advancement of the fighter to combat the threat of the bomber, which gave the notion to some that a war could be winnable.

And it is the same today, we have similar fears, and I believe there will be the similar reluctance all round in using WMDs, while to a degree the delivery method may have changed, the recent advancements in anti-ballistic/anti-air missiles has begun to negates that threat (to a similar degree the advancement in fighter design negated the threat of the bomber in the run up to WW2)

My concern is that the Social, Political, Economic and Militaristic Landscapes are far too similar to those at the end of the interwar period for comfort, not to mention the main threat of MAD is being eroded to the point that I am sure some, like in WW2 will again start to think another war is winnable.

I hope I am wrong.

Typing too quickly.. that is SCIFI... I have yet to work out what SCIF is.. probably a nasty rash in the nether regions.

And that is knock us back, not know us back to the dark ages.. *shakes head* Dam, should have reread it more than once.

hey ho, time for a coffee..

that is because dropping those two bombs ended the war and now just one detonation would really have a sever impact on so many different levels and there is no way it would only be one detonation, probably enough to really fuck things up.

Friend most wars are manipulated events with very specific agendas...either to agressively show power and force to steal, plunder or take control of other peoples key resources, assets and introduce external control mechanisms. They are also a standard farm management processes to de-populate if things are getting difficult (and the masses show signs that they want major system changes). they are also created to artificially polarise people to create division(and selective unity)for war manage and re-control.

In reality wars have very little to do with either peace, stability or democracy and never have...just corrupt elite games for elite regime change really..always to the exploitation, cost and suffering of the masses.

once i saw a tr3b, i realised they have technology far in advance of what we currently 'know' about

i think there definitely WILL be a limited depopulation war, which imo ALL sides want, but to think that the USA/UK will lose any war is retarded.

cities?

The word is severe not sever. Learn how to spell before you start giving advice on geo-political issues.

once i saw a tr3b, i realised they have technology far in advance of what we currently 'know' about

Huh?

What is a tr3b?

Sorry for yesterday i typed this thread and i fell asleep....
The objetive of this thread is to discuss wich targets are the most likely to be hit....extension of damage in alll countries but specifically u.s.a and mexico...See I don't like the idea of war...even I feel that central mexico will be spared from direct hits. But I think that is important from everybody here know the possibilities and spread to our relatives and loved ones all the information possible.