Probable nuclear targets in the USA by Russia.

[MillCreek]

http://www.iflscience.com/editors-blog/here-are-the-areas-in-the-us-most-likely-to-be-struck-in-a-nuclear-attack-by-russia/

Uh oh.  Look at the upper left corner of the map.  I am about eight miles, as the ICBM flies, from Naval Radio Station Jim Creek.

[Fitz]

man they are REALLY pushing the new cold war angle, aren't they

[Fly320s]

http://www.iflscience.com/editors-blog/here-are-the-areas-in-the-us-most-likely-to-be-struck-in-a-nuclear-attack-by-russia/

That's all? 

How many hundreds of nukes does the Russkies have?  I assumed most of the US would be melted into organic, free-ranging, gluten-free glass.  There are many more military bases capable of launching strikes on the Godless commies.

[Angel Eyes]

Zero targets in California?

That seems unlikely.

[RoadKingLarry]

Utter bullfeathers.
Norfolk, San Diego, Charleston,  and Groton to add just a few.
If they were actually going to do an all out strike LA and San Francisco Bay area would also get leveled.
But yeah I'm seeing more and more "The Russians are EVIIILLL!!!" crap coming from the libtarded left. Almost makes me wonder if we'd already be at war with Russia if Hillary had won.

[HankB]

Zero targets in California?

That seems unlikely.

Why? Aren't they good Communists?


(Hey, SOMEONE had to say it, right?     )

[griz]

Utter bullfeathers.
Norfolk, San Diego, Charleston,  and Groton to add just a few.
If they were actually going to do an all out strike LA and San Francisco Bay area would also get leveled.
But yeah I'm seeing more and more "The Russians are EVIIILLL!!!" crap coming from the libtarded left. Almost makes me wonder if we'd already be at war with Russia if Hillary had won.

Gotta agree.  Besides the Norfolk Navy base, there is the Ampib base, Ft. Eustis and Langley on the other side of the river.  If that's not a bullseye what is?

[makattak]

I'm wondering if White Sulfur Springs is still on their target list.

[RevDisk]

Utter bullfeathers.
Norfolk, San Diego, Charleston,  and Groton to add just a few.
If they were actually going to do an all out strike LA and San Francisco Bay area would also get leveled.
But yeah I'm seeing more and more "The Russians are EVIIILLL!!!" crap coming from the libtarded left. Almost makes me wonder if we'd already be at war with Russia if Hillary had won.

I noticed folks trying to drum up war propaganda Russia as well. Russia is doing plenty of bad things, but I'm curious of people's motivations. Russia is the only country on the planet with more nukes than us. And a moderately decent military. We Americans like to play at war. We haven't faced a real war (ie direct harm to the US) since 1860's with the Civil War. Or 1812 against the British. That's a long history of people being unfamiliar with their homes being burned, their children dead in the mud, rampant starvation, etc. Russia has vast stockpiles of weapons fully equal to our own in terms of lethality, and the will to likely use them if faced with outside invasion.

What is the possible gain of going to war with them for non-essential reasons? I could understand the EU doing so over Ukraine, but they sold out the Ukrainian people in short order. If they invade an ally of our's, fine, it's what we must do. But why would Hillary and company want to start an optional war with Russia?

[makattak]

What is the possible gain of going to war with them for non-essential reasons? I could understand the EU doing so over Ukraine, but they sold out the Ukrainian people in short order. If they invade an ally of our's, fine, it's what we must do. But why would Hillary and company want to start an optional war with Russia?

For the same reason Democrat politicians do anything: they believe it is to their political advantage.

[cordex]

If they were actually going to do an all out strike

Ignoring for the moment non state actors and covert attacks, if a nation gets to the point of overtly launching nukes at us they will launch all the land-based ICBMs they have.  Wait, wait.  I'm worried what you heard was, "they will launch a lot of ICBMs."  What I said was, "they will launch all the land-based ICBMs they have." 

Sure, they may keep some warheads stationed on boats and subs in reserve, but fixed installations are going to get plastered in the return volley anyway, so they will want to get as many in the air as possible.

A country like Russia with plenty of warheads will certainly target C&C and military bases both for us and our nuclear-capable allies, but I'm guessing they have tasked a good number to population centers and non-military logistical targets as well.  I'm certain we plan on doing the same.

[Hawkmoon]

Oh, Lord.

And I was thinking if I made a pilgrimage to Maine and Acadia National Park that it would also be nice to head farther "down east" to Lubec and Campobello Island. Seems like that's right in the neighborhood of the northeastern VLF target.

[zxcvbob]

Houston, NYC, and Chicago to wipe out our economy and kill millions of people, San Antonio because there's multiple military bases there, Oklahoma City (Tinker AFB), and how about some bizarre targets like Yellowstone and the Long Valley caldera in California (try to trigger a supervolcano eruption)

I think I'd hit the volcanoes first just to see if it worked  

[Pb]

I'm pretty sure there are LOT more targets than that on the Russian's real list...  good grief.

[agricola]

I noticed folks trying to drum up war propaganda Russia as well. Russia is doing plenty of bad things, but I'm curious of people's motivations. Russia is the only country on the planet with more nukes than us. And a moderately decent military. We Americans like to play at war. We haven't faced a real war (ie direct harm to the US) since 1860's with the Civil War. Or 1812 against the British. That's a long history of people being unfamiliar with their homes being burned, their children dead in the mud, rampant starvation, etc. Russia has vast stockpiles of weapons fully equal to our own in terms of lethality, and the will to likely use them if faced with outside invasion.

What is the possible gain of going to war with them for non-essential reasons? I could understand the EU doing so over Ukraine, but they sold out the Ukrainian people in short order. If they invade an ally of our's, fine, it's what we must do. But why would Hillary and company want to start an optional war with Russia?

Perhaps it is something akin to with the West fighting a war against Sunni fundamentalist extremism by invading, and threatening to invade, countries that aren't run by Sunni fundamentalist regimes.

[Fly320s]

Wait, wait.  I'm worried what you heard was, "they will launch a lot of ICBMs."  What I said was, "they will launch all the land-based ICBMs they have." 

Well said, Ron Swanson.

[MechAg94]

Does anyone know the actual blast footprint of the average Russkie ICBM?  Just curious as some cities are pretty big.  

Should I be insulted that there are no targets listed in Texas?

[MechAg94]

I would actually be more curious how many ICBMs we still have in full readiness to fire on short notice.  ....but maybe I don't want to know.

[HeroHog]

I live 4 miles from Barksdale AFB. If the balloon goes up, we're pretty much toast.

[lupinus]

Does anyone know the actual blast footprint of the average Russkie ICBM?  Just curious as some cities are pretty big.  

Should I be insulted that there are no targets listed in Texas?

Imagine it would depend on the spread of the warheads and their targeting.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[dogmush]

Does anyone know the actual blast footprint of the average Russkie ICBM?  Just curious as some cities are pretty big.  

Should I be insulted that there are no targets listed in Texas?

http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/

See for yourself.  The kinda "standard" MIRV load is ~750KT, but each of the big land based ICBM's would have 10 or so warheads.  They can also bolt one big ass (~20MT) warhead to an R36.

Those truck mounted missiles you saw in May Day parades had 1 "small" ~600kt warhead, but there were a crap ton of those trucks.

Russia also fielded a new SLBM in the early 2010's.  I'd expect them to be loaded with 10-12 MIRVs.  According to Wikipedia, The Russian Navy has 1 Typhoon, 6 Delta IV's, 3 Delta III's and 3 of the new Borei missile subs, although I have no idea how many are underway at any given time, or even ready to sail.

[HeroHog]

If they hit Barksdale AFB, to survive, it has to be under a 300kt ground burst for us.

[MechAg94]

http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/

See for yourself.  The kinda "standard" MIRV load is ~750KT, but each of the big land based ICBM's would have 10 or so warheads.  They can also bolt one big ass (~20MT) warhead to an R36.

Those truck mounted missiles you saw in May Day parades had 1 "small" ~600kt warhead, but there were a crap ton of those trucks.

Russia also fielded a new SLBM in the early 2010's.  I'd expect them to be loaded with 10-12 MIRVs.  According to Wikipedia, The Russian Navy has 1 Typhoon, 6 Delta IV's, 3 Delta III's and 3 of the new Borei missile subs, although I have no idea how many are underway at any given time, or even ready to sail.

Nice link.  I remember a description of a 1 megaton blast from years ago, but that is better.  A 1 megaton wouldn't destroy all of Houston, but it would gut downtown pretty good.  One could do a good job on the Houston ship channel area also.