WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2026 Poal.co

331

Speaking of intercontinental missiles.

Does an intercontinental nuke stand a chance of hitting its target given how advanced our "anti" systems are?

Please disregard hypersonic missiles. I'm speaking only of conventional intercontinental missiles.

Speaking of intercontinental missiles. Does an intercontinental nuke stand a chance of hitting its target given how advanced our "anti" systems are? Please disregard hypersonic missiles. I'm speaking only of conventional intercontinental missiles.

(post is archived)

[–] 2 pts

There is no need for the nuke to hit the target.

Detonating a nuke in the atmosphere above the country will release an EMP wave that will destroy majority of electronic devices and throw the country back into stone age.

[–] 0 pt

Except for carburated, conventional ignition vehicles. Read " One minute after". The cranky old woman drives her Edsel around town. After an EMP event, it's th he only running car around.

[–] 0 pt (edited )

That's has nothing to do with my question. I know how aerial blast nukes work. But could they even make it far enough to detonate over the target?

[–] 2 pts

Username checks out.

I'll explain it to you like you are 5 years old:

US doesn't have an protection form space based and high altitude missile attacks, so there would be no need for anyone to try to hit you directly with an nuclear strike when they can just take out your technology and watch niggers burn the rest to the ground.

[–] 0 pt

Why are you continually responding while not answering the question? I'm not asking for scenarios. The question is in plain English. And I've even edited it to make it more clear what I am asking. Space weapons are NOT conventional weapons. Get with it or find another question to not answer elsewhere.