Still to this day we are threatened by nuclear weapons:

https://kyivindependent.com/shoigu-threatens-europe-with-nuclear-weapons-if-russ...





April 24, 2025



Russia reserves the right to use nuclear weapons if faced with 'unfriendly actions,' Russian Security Council Secretary Sergei Shoigu claimed in an interview with TASS state news agency on April 24.

Shoigu said Moscow was "closely monitoring" the "military preparations" of European countries, as they seek to ramp up defense spending and production in the face of the U.S. reducing its military presence on the continent.

"In case foreign states commit unfriendly actions that threaten the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Russian Federation, our country considers it legitimate to take symmetrical and asymmetrical measures necessary to suppress such actions and prevent their recurrence," he said.

"Nuclear deterrence is carried out against states and military coalitions that regard Russia as a potential adversary, possess weapons of mass destruction, or have significant combat capabilities of general-purpose forces," he added.

Shoigu also said that any European future peacekeeping forces deployed to Ukraine to monitor a ceasefire would also be seen by the Kremlin as a provocation.

"Sensible politicians in Europe understand that the implementation of such a scenario could lead to a direct clash between NATO and Russia and subsequently to World War III," he said.



In November 2024, Russia updated its official nuclear deterrence policy. According to the changes, the Kremlin reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in response to aggression against itself or its closest ally, Belarus, even if the attack involves non-nuclear weapons.

Russia has repeatedly made nuclear threats against Ukraine and the West since the beginning of the full-scale invasion in February 2022. The threats have failed to materialize, and Russia continues to wage its all-out war without using its nuclear arsenal.

OK for all you science buffs.
An excellent series on the science behind nuclear weapons:

Looks like this one is the last in that series:

Bobby. wrote on May 12^th, 2025 at 10:30pm:



Is that under the LNT model or real life observations?

Exactly right. And yet people are exposed to radiation every day, from multiple sources, the Sun, Granite and many others. But the body has this marvellous capability of repairing itself. Of course that does not been you can continue getting sunburnt every day.

Best to play at 0.75 speed as he talks too fast:

The horrors of the H Bomb.

Who Invented the Hydrogen Bomb?

Bobby. wrote on Oct 30^th, 2025 at 3:00pm:



https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/attach/2015/05/Hair-Trigger-Alert-Policy...




Prompt-launch status, however, increases the risk
that weapons could be launched by accident, without
authorization, or by mistake in response to a false warning of
an incoming attack.
Current tensions with Russia make it even more
important to ensure that a crisis—with its attendant increase
in opportunities for misunderstandings and time pressure on
decision makers—does not lead to a mistake that triggers an
unintended nuclear exchange.
As a first step to increasing security, the United States and
Russia should remove their silo-based missiles from hairtrigger alert. But even without Russian reciprocation, the
United States would enhance its own security—and that of the
world—if it took this action. U.S. land-based missiles can be
removed from hair-trigger alert by utilizing an existing safety
switch in the silos that is routinely used to prevent launches
during maintenance.

It's 80 years since Hiroshima and Nagasaki
and still every person in the world has the threat of being killed by nuclear weapons.
The fact that many are on a hair trigger is disgraceful.

All it would need is for human beings to declare that it's not acceptable
and verifiable rules to be put into place to stop hair trigger systems,
and the gradual dismantling and removal of all nuclear weapons.

You'd think 80 years would be long enough to do it?
It depresses me to see how pathetic our world leaders have always been.

https://www.reuters.com/world/china/trump-asks-pentagon-immediately-start-testin...



Robert Floyd, head of the Vienna-based Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization, expressed alarm.
"Any explosive nuclear weapon test by any state would be harmful and destabilising for global non-proliferation efforts and for international peace and security," he said.


U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has repeatedly said current nuclear risks are already alarmingly high and urged countries to avoid all actions that could lead to miscalculation or escalation with "catastrophic" consequences, said deputy U.N. spokesperson Farhan Haq.
"As he has said, we must never forget the disastrous legacy of over 2,000 nuclear weapons tests carried out over the last 80 years, and that nuclear testing can never be permitted under any circumstances," said Haq.

lee wrote on Oct 31^st, 2025 at 6:33pm:



Radioactive contamination and a world held hostage by nuclear weapons.

lee wrote on Nov 1^st, 2025 at 2:41pm:



This is the Environment MRB.
Should I go into great detail about all the radioactive pollution in the world?
It's a simple Google search that anyone could do and doesn't need me to prove it.
Radioactive waste has been dumped in our oceans,
nuclear sites are still so contaminated that no one can live there.
The Russians still have old nuke subs rusting away in ports.

lee wrote on Nov 1^st, 2025 at 3:17pm:


Google AI:

The linear no-threshold (LNT) model is a model used in radiation protection that assumes a direct, proportional relationship between radiation dose and the risk of stochastic health effects like cancer, meaning there is no "safe" threshold for radiation exposure. This model is the basis for current radiation protection regulations and the "as low as reasonably achievable" (ALARA) principle, and is intended as a precautionary measure because the risks at very low doses are difficult to measure. However, the LNT model is controversial, with some experts suggesting that low doses may not be harmful or could even be beneficial (a concept known as hormesis), and there is an ongoing scientific debate about its accuracy at low doses. 


Key assumptions of the LNT model
Linear dose response: The risk of cancer is directly proportional to the dose. A higher dose equals a higher risk, in a straight-line relationship.


No threshold: There is no dose below which the risk of harm is zero. Every increment of radiation, no matter how small, increases the risk.


Precautionary principle: The model is a conservative approach to ensure safety, especially when the effects of low-dose exposure are not well understood.


Applications and implications
Radiation protection: The LNT model forms the foundation for international radiation protection systems and regulations.
Risk assessment: It is used to estimate the risk of cancer and other health effects from radiation exposure, for example, in determining cleanup levels for contaminated environments.


ALARA principle: The "as low as reasonably achievable" (ALARA) principle stems from the LNT model, promoting the reduction of radiation exposure to the lowest possible levels.


Controversy and debate
Scientific debate: The LNT model is subject to scientific debate, and its validity at low doses is questioned by some experts.
Hormesis: Some scientific evidence suggests that low-level radiation exposure might have a beneficial effect (hormesis), which contradicts the LNT model.


Statistical limitations: At very low doses, the risk is difficult to detect and measure due to the small number of affected individuals compared to the total population and the limitations of statistical data.
Human repair mechanisms: The model is criticized for not fully accounting for the body's natural DNA repair mechanisms and other protective biological processes that are effective at low doses.

Oct 31, 2025 

In this video, we discuss the amazing true scale of America's Nuclear Weapons, particularly the LGM-30 Minuteman III.

The LGM-30 Minuteman III is a three-stage solid-fuel intercontinental ballistic missile with a complex guidance system and stands as American’s land-based nuclear deterrent. As of 2025, the United States has 400 Minuteman intercontinental ballistic missiles deployed, fully armed, ready to be launched from their silos at the President's command.

In this video, we take a detailed look at the missile's W-87 300 kiloton Nuclear Warhead, the Post Boost Vehicle that delivers the warhead, the ICBM's three solid fuel stages, the missile's flight sequence, and ultimately simulate the detonation of its warhead over the capital of China, the city of Beijing with a population of 22 million Chinese civilians.

.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/38125124/terrifying-arms-race-us-russia-nuclear-tr...




By Sayan Bose, Foreign News Reporter

FROM the time America conducted its Trinity nuclear bomb detonation in 1945 to 1992, the US detonated 1,030 atomic bombs in tests, the most than any other country.

Those figures do not include the two nuclear weapons America used against Japan in Hiroshima and Nagasaki at the end of World War II.

The first American tests were atmospheric, but they were then moved underground to limit nuclear fallout.

Scientists have come to refer to such tests as shots. The last such shot, called Divider as part of Operation Julin, took place September 23, 1992, at the Nevada National Security Sites, a sprawling compound some 65 miles from Las Vegas.

America halted its tests for a couple of reasons.

The first was the collapse of the Soviet Union at the end of the Cold War.

Secondly, the US signed the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty in 1996.

There have been tests since the treaty, however, by India, North Korea and Pakistan, the world’s newest nuclear powers.

The United Kingdom and France also have nuclear weapons, while Israel has long been suspected of possessing atomic bombs.

But broadly speaking, the US also had decades of data from tests, allowing it to use computer modelling and other techniques to determine whether a weapon would successfully detonate.

Every president since Barack Obama has backed plans to modernise America’s nuclear arsenal, whose maintenance and ,
according to the Congressional Budget Office.

The US relies on the so-called nuclear triad: ground-based silos, aircraft-carried bombs and nuclear-tipped missiles in submarines at sea to deter others from launching their weapons against America