Teacher Reacts To "The Terrifying True Scale of Nuclear Weapons" [DISGUSTING]
Vložit
- čas přidán 26. 06. 2022
- My name is Michael! I teach geography, history, religion, social science and physical education. Way too many subjects if you ask me... I don't claim to be an expert in any of these subjects.
Although I am pretty awesome at PE!
Original video: • The Terrifying True Sc...
Music: ♪ Biscuit (Prod. by Lukrembo)
Link : • (no copyright music) l...
Take care!
"Mount Everest is Thick" Either a man of culture or confused
Culture
Dropping the Einstein quote before someone else does:
“Mankind invented the atomic bomb, but no mouse would ever construct a mousetrap.”
Mice are dumb...
Though they would if they knew how, to secure food for their family and defend against rivals. Lots of animals of the same species already kill each other for competition. If lions were in our place they would have built nukes too.
@@kingofflames738 In a way you are saying things were meant to happen this way because life? Bullshit mate. While we cannot know what animals would do in our situation, not all species are built the same. I agree with your example of lions but what if herbivores were the ones to gain our levels of intelligence? Do not say something as if its a fact when you cannot test it, verify it or even back up your claim properly. The world is fucked and the people in power (IN ALL NATIONS) are to blame for the state of our world, I dont wanna take their blame away by saying well this is just the way its meant to be. NO. These people deserve all the blame, hate and mistrust we humans are more than capable of giving, but instead of pointing it at innocent civilians, it should all be aimed at those bastards.
That's a flawed quote. Because a mouse doesn't have the intellectual capacity, or enough dexterity to manipulate the world around it enough to build a mousetrap. Why bother with the thought of doing something if that thing is literally impossible for you to do for multiple reasons? Give a mouse human-like intelligence, and opposable thumbs and then we can see who's right.
Castle Bravo was definitely not a flex...it was actually a huge mistake. The calculated size of the bomb they were testing was 6 megatonnes, but there was an unanticipated reaction of lithium in the detonation, and it ran away to the 15 megatonnes size and contaminated areas far outside the controlled zone. The B83 is what is known as a "dial a yield" weapon, which can detonate with an explosive force of anywhere between about 5 kilotons up to the maximum 1.2 megatons noted in the video...so it was designed to be versatile, which I guess is kind of a flex by itself.
Actually they thought it would be 5
Yep, Castle Bravo was insane.
R.I.P Bikini Atoll: ????- 1954
So, in conclusion, we can actually thank the Soviet Union for ending the nuclear arms race. The Tsar Bomba made the world realize that we had finally gone too far. Not long after the Tsar Bomba detonation, the US and Soviet Union started engaging in talks to end the nuclear arms race, with the space race effectively replacing it.
It also happened to be one of the cleanest nukes measured on yield/fallout ratio.
Probably for the simple reason that it was so insanely powerful.
A quote from a movie ( don't remember which one ) : I'm not afraid of someone who wants 10 nuclear weapons. I'm afraid of someone who wants only one.
Anyways, this is a scary video and I didn't know that there were still so many nukes in the world. Will humanity kill itself with nukes ? Probably yes, because ..... humans
Sum of all fears, maybe? Would have to check 😅
Damn thats a really good quote!!
@@tonikaihola5408 I found it. It's from the Peacemaker ( 1997 ) : and the exact quote is : Julia Kelly : He's just a delivery boy. I'm not afraid of the man who wants ten nuclear weapons, Colonel. I'm terrified of the man who only wants one. ...
But , yeah . still scary
@@robwillems7200 Of course, that’s the one. Love it 😅
@@simpleviking 1:36 what is your answer to that moral question ? I've read many articles saying that it's nescessary like one said "A bloody invasion and round-the-clock conventional bombing would have led to a far higher death toll and so the atomic weapons actually saved thousands of American and millions of Japanese lives. The bombs were the best means to bring about unconditional surrender, which is what the US leaders wanted."
What do you think ?
Nuclear weapons are also (still) a big topic here in Germany, as we participate in "nuclear sharing", as does Belgium, the Netherlands, Italy, and Turkey, being part of NATO. Meaning, the weapons are stored on German military bases (with frighteningly little security!) and deployed on German planes if they are ever to be used (with the detonation key controlled by the USofA, if I understand correctly).
The shock wave from the Tsar bomb went around the world 3 times! That's just crazy!
And that was just a scaled down version.
Tactical nukes are measured in the kiloton range, most tacticals not bigger than 30-50 kilotons.
"I'm surprised we haven't killed ourselves by now" Don't worry, be optimistic, we still can work on it and achieve that 😁😁
makes me think of "russians" by sting. and of the quote "there is no pacifist bomb"
"We're intuitive, amazing at inventing things, but we're also stupid" perfect description
On Nuke map, I find it much more helpful to use your own home location instead of a city. It gives a much more personal and emotionally effective look at the scale of the destruction these weapons would cause. Even though the Davy Crockett is the smallest at 20t, it would still completely eviscerate my own neighbourhood.
"Then the war would have continued for, some period of time?"
Yes. The war would have gone on for much MUCH longer. Which would have resulted in the deaths of more Americans, Japanese (both soldiers but mostly civilians), Allied forces, and even the Soviets were about to co-invade with the US.
You have to ask yourself this *very* important question, why was there TWO bombs dropped?!... Simple answer, because one was NOT enough.
The Japanese at the time were so crazy fanatical and viciously cruel in their ways. In Okinawa (which is regarded by most historians as a tiny window into what the theoretical "Invasion of Japan" would have looked like. The Japanese soldiers used civilians are human shields, wrapped civilians with explosives to have the run at US positions (as seen in the series "The Pacific), and wrapped infants with explosives then left them on the ground. That when an American soldier went to go save them they would both be vaporized. The mainland propaganda machine for defense of Japan was literally called "the glorious death of 100 million." They were even training little kids (even the little girls) to use guns and melee weapons. They had thousands of kamikaze pilots and scuba divers for the defense of the coasts.
Their fanaticism was so insane even after the SECOND atomic bomb, when even the Emperor Hirohito (a man they regarded as a god) was going to surrender... They launched a nearly successful coup against him for that! For more info, watch this video, and also Mark Felton's work on the matter.
czcams.com/video/WwvwTuMSBEY/video.html&ab_channel=TheFront
EDIT: Also, the US government believed that so many men were about to be killed or wounded in the invasion. They minted an extra 500,000 purple heart medals for it.... We are STILL giving those very medals out to wounded soldiers even today. The Invasion of Japan would have made D-Day look like a gentle breeze.
Even if this was real (and it isn't completely, but that isn't important now), what Americans did was still a crime of war. Bombarding civilian without give them time to evacuate is consider a crime in all the world. We blame Putin today because he did this. The Americans could drop the bombs and show their power without killing 200,000 innocent people. There is no justification for such an act, and all of us should condamn it. If we don't do it, all that people would have died in vain, and we can't be surprise if today we are about to repeat the same mistake
@@fabriziobiancucci7702 Your statement is incorrect. The US did not start the conflict with Japan, Japan attacked the U.S. Additionally, Japan was aligned with Germany who the US knew was also getting ready to test and eventually use, a nuclear device. Make no mistake, the Japanese and the Germans (of WWll) would not have hesitated to use any means available to lay waste to western civilization. Let’s not forget, Germany used a simple chemical gas compound to annihilate 6 million “civilian innocents”. While not as efficient as nuclear weapons, equally as deadly. While the use of nuclear weapons is tragic, it’s a human characteristic that sometimes, too many times, the human race has to actually experience the horrors of our own insanity to understand how real it is and hopefully, never engage in their use again. Comparing that situation to blaming Putin for what he has started in Ukraine is completely inaccurate and in no way similar.
What's interesting is that the atomic bomb was not the deciding factor of the world war. The Japanese were still willing to fight. It wasn't until Russia declared war on them shortly after the bombing that they decided to surrender, specifically to the US since they knew the US would be far more merciful compared to Russia. And the nukes were mostly used by the US as a show of power to the rest of the world, especially seeing as how the Soviet Union was puppeting the nations it marched through.
Contrary to popular belief, the nukes were also not directed at military installations and were blatantly set for civilian cities.
I'm a US citizen and proud that I got to be born here, but it's important to know the true facts of what skeletons your country actually has in it's closet so you can see to it that they don't repeat the sins of the past.
I doubt that 15,6k Atomic bombs would destroy earth even one time.... not to say dozens of time... just measure the range of those atomic bombs, calculate, how many can be deployed on rockets or planes, how many would be destroyed before getting detonated, and the threat is easily survivable with a reasonable ammount of prepping and/or luck.
Even with every nuke existing detonated well-distributed, the destroyed area would only account for a rouch approximated land mass the size of US or China at max. Which is much, but not enough to destroy the world. The bigger area of radioactive fallout would be a problem, reducing humanities lifespan due to cancer and more birth defects, but people can life under these circumstances with some protection just fine.
I wonder what happened with all the fallout material from these bomb tests. Did it all perish into the oceans which got just a tiny tick more radiation?
Anyway, you could make the world completely uninhabitable by blowing only a hand full of dirty bombs (cobalt bombs) at the right spots. Fallout would fill the sky and contaminate everything.
U can live in radioactive contaminated areas just fine with some protection... shorter lifespan, yes, but u can. There is a japanese man that was hit by the hiroshima bomb, went to his familys place in nagasaki by train and got hit again and survived... and then he lived to the age of around 70 or 80... real story.
@@robertbretschneider765 yeah, but in my scenario the whole world is contaminated. This Japanese man surely didn't live in the bomb's impact zone afterwards. You would hardly find enough protection for everybody and be able to grow food in masses.
Humanity might survive but how many of the currently 8 billion would be left?
And basically the complete Fauna would be reset as they don't have any protection.
@@1989Azrael Look at the nature in Tschernobyl. ^^ They like that radiation, because it keeps humans away, so they grow in numbers... Radiation is only natural... contamination cant be so high that nature is reset, there isnt enough radioactive cobalt to harm them enough... ^^ The levels of radiation are getting closer and closer to natural levels over time, no problem.
To clean food from radioactive contamination is the hard part, i agree on that... eating radioactive contaminated food is a different story than just running around with protective gear...
But if its survivable, people will have to go with it... less life expectancy... then our social aging problem might be reduced for a while. ^^ And nuclear winter might reduce heat from climate change temporarily... always stay positive... ^^
A bomb like the tsar bomb, if placed inside Mt everest could probably delete the entire mountain from existence.
I am ahuge fan from India. Love your content ❤️ please make more Geography Now videos 💙
If you think about it mankind literally made the most powerful bomb in history and the decide to slap on some poison damage that last for multiple decades
I do agree that using nukes is a very terrible thing, but within the context of WW2 and Japan it was probably better option then the other alternative Operation Downfall. RealLifeLores "the insane american plan to invade japan in 1945" goes more into it and you should definitely watch it
Destroying the U.S. and saturation bombing it with theoretical Tsar bombas are different things. If you mean the latter, then it would probably take something more than 100 due to the limitations of the destructive force. The continental United States is a massive thing.
I served in the US Air Force for 30 years, and the first half of my career I was a "cold-war warrior." I have extensive knowledge of nuclear weapons, how they would likely be employed, and their effects. I want to make it clear that nuclear combat on any scale would be an unprecedented catastrophe in the annals of warfare, but the extrapolated conclusions from videos such as this are absurd. Having a nuclear weapon is not the same as being able to effectively employ it. Additionally, detonating a nuclear weapons is an incredibly sophisticated process, it's nothing like a conventional bomb with a fuse impacting a target. I too am concerned about the proliferation of nuclear weapons, and look forward to the day when we get rid of them. Until that day, just know that the US, the UK and France have the most reliable and accurate weapons, and I believe their primary targets are to destroy the nuclear capabilities of adversarial countries, and I'm convinced they would be highly successful to that end.
Yup, nukes are build to not go off. OR rather, so that it takes a lot of things to go right for a proper blast.
U can live in radioactive contaminated areas just fine with some protection... shorter lifespan, yes, but u can. There is a japanese man that was hit by the hiroshima bomb, went to his familys place in nagasaki by train and got hit again and survived... and then he lived to the age of around 70 or 80... real story.
7:50 but only India and China have the No first strike policy.
Only countries I'd be scared of are Pakistan and NK
We also lost a few nukes. I have no idea how the fuck you lose weapon of mass destruction but it happened multiple times
It is a question that should not exist indeed, considering way more died from the radiation poisoning that came after the blast.
On Nukemap 3d. A 100 MT Tsar Bomba's fireball is barely smaller than Mt Everest.
Which means... Almost all of Mt Everest would get Vaporized whilst the way tip that survives will just fall for miles and get destroyed from fall anyway LOL.
So yeh. Theoretical 100 Mt Tsar Bomba can destroy Mt Everest.
Whilst 50 Mt actual one makes a large dent.
As much as it is painful for me to write this, those 2 bombs in Japan killed thousands, but at the same time saved millions. Superpowers now know the true scale and destruction a single nuke does, and no one wants a war against another nuclear powered nation cuz no one wins, so, in a sense, it was sort of a necessary evil to prevent further deaths. Anyone agrees?
Dont underestimate Mountains... i dont think u would destroy mount everest if u dropped the theoretical tsar bomba on top of it... but u might reduce its height by 3000 metres if u detonate it from below.... maybe. (And turn it into a part-time radioactive, possible volcano?) Atomic bombs are just doomsday weapons in theory, coming down to a real military "use", they are just a lot of radioactive hot air. Humanity will manage that easily.
There were lots of crazy plans for peaceful use. They were crazy for good reasons. Too crazy to be used.
It’s cool yet scary but once u realize how meaningless even nuclear weapons are since there is a giant star tht if it exploded and earth was in its sights 8,000 light years away the energy that would hit us even if for 5 seconds would wipe out almost all life and earth would be a hell scape and these bombs are right in our atmosphere while this star is 8,000 light years away couldn’t even see with ya eye or a pair of binoculars
In India we used 5000 years ago and millions years ago so many times used nuclear bombs as called astras father atomic bomb Oppenheimer idea also Indian astras so this nuclears we made bigger than that's now big as much as astras
Didn't Ozzy Osbourne sing, thank God for the bomb?
Russia would not have invaded if Nato was not in the mix
Yeah, Humankind is doomed.
I highly highly recommend watching Kurzgesagt’s video titled “what if we nuked a city”
czcams.com/video/5iPH-br_eJQ/video.html
It really… puts all of this into perspective.
Please react to geography now South Africa 🇿🇦
Ayo .... India and france the safest of them all .. infact you gotta worry bout UK more than india
Nice livingroom
Haha its alright, really tiny
@@simpleviking haha
I chose the NUKE
Hello! I came from France I want to say hello ! Bon sa va (it means well are you ok)
Well, in 1945, the nukes saved many more Japanese, Americans, Russians and Chinese.
Nowadays, it'd be lunacy -- something which Putin struggles to understand.
If Russia went to war with NATO, the only way Russia could win is by using nuclear weapons since the NATO armed forces would absolutely destroy Russia. Our only hope would be that both sides could agree to stand down, which isn't very likely.
@@WolfHeathen - It's not really a "win" for Russia, of course. The best hop would be that most of them would fail during launch, have guidance/targeting issues or get shot in flight.
A ground invasion of Japan would have likely ended with almost everyone in the country dead. They were ready to fight to the last child by most accounts.
@@netragtulb The allies were very much planning an invasion of the Japanese home islands. You don't need a Navy to still be a threat. How much did the Russian Navy contribute to WW2? You don't really hear about it since they were not a major factor.
@@netragtulb actually there was a legitimate plan called operation downfall which was a plan to invade Japan if it didn't surrender.
That's Bullshit, sir.
Almost everyone in the country? Highly fucking doubt that.
Even with that, Americans could drop the bombs in other places, like military bases. Or in any case, they should give the population the time to evacuate. Destroy civil buildings without give them time to go away is a crime of war, and today we blame Putin for this. So why we justify the Americans for a crime thousands of times bigger? Killing 200,000 people (not to mention all the ones that dies in the following months and years for the consequences of the explosion) is a monstrous crime that has no justification, and everyone should condamn it
It’s ridiculous that the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are treated as “disgusting” when it’s not even the largest loss of civilian life caused by the US. The fire bombings of Tokyo killed way more people and caused much more destruction but nope nuclear weapons scary and bad, when in actuality they’ve literally led to the longest amount of peace between world powers in hundreds of years. The nuclear deterrent is real and has worked for almost 80 years now, and if I’m a pile of radioactive rubble 20 years from now well then you guys get to say “I told you so” but until then I’m enjoying my peaceful life.
Oh and also the bombs were the most efficient and bloodless way of ending the war. The Japanese military command while cornered was preparing to fight to the last man and were training civilians to fight to the end or kill themselves rather than surrender. Remember Saipan? Yeah imagine that on a national scale. The plan of operation downfall (the ground landing of the main island) would’ve killed an estimated million US soldier and millions more Japanese. Not to mention the million Japanese soldiers still in Manchuria at the time. The Soviets knew we were going to win and Stalin wanted as much land as he could take. Which is why after the bombs were dropped he seized his only remaining opportunity and ploughed right through Manchuria. Imagine a prolonged war between the Japanese and Soviets both sides who engaged heavily in battles of attrition and practically threw bodies at one another. The bombs ended that possible war and saved both sides from meaningless slaughter.
Another argument against the bomb was the blockade we had against Japan, yes we could’ve starved them out but at what cost? Millions more civilian deaths from starvation and malnutrition? You think the government would’ve given up at that? They were already in a famine and yet the war effort continued ferociously. Hell even when the emperor sued for peace a faction of the Japanese military held a coup so they could continue it despite knowing the repercussions. You see how stupid it is to assume they would’ve surrendered without such a major show of force.
Now don’t get me wrong the Allies and especially the US were up to dubious shit as well with plenty of war crimes. The experimentation of the survivors of the bombs was heinous and did happen but to say it would’ve been better without using the bombs is being ignorant of history. Nuclear weapons would always have existed even if they weren’t developed by the US and used on Japan. In the end some other country would’ve used them first instead and we could be living in a much worse world today if that were the case.
Deterents would have been developed regardless of where those bombs were dropped or by whoever,saying the world would have been less safer or much worse not a good argument.
Big boom
Дурачки посмотрели, дурачки не поняли!
If a Nuke is dropped anywhere , the world is over , everybody gonna launch nuke in return ...
Thats pretty scary...
Is he pronouncing Belarus wrong?
And why you are not worry about France and UK having nuclear bomb....??🤷🤷UK have the history of invading other countries and having colonial mindset people, Although the scale of French colonial mindset is comparative low to that of UK but France also have colonies around the world so,what's your logic for UK and France having Nuclear bomb is safe for the world???🤷
You messed something up. Japan in ww2 was allready surrendering before the USA bombed them in hell with these atomic bombs back then.
I tell you why Japan allready had surrendered at that time, because the sovjetunion was standing before there doors, they doesn't wanted too be invaded by them, so they surrendered too the usa.
With these plans Japan moved there people too hiroshima and Nagasaki because the usa never bombed them before so there civilians where save there.
But the US wanted too demonstrate how powerfull they are too the sovjetunion so they, not bombed Nagasaki and hiroshima, the Plan allways was too drop these bombs there from the beggining.
Soo the usa not answered the surrender of Japan, they just answered it after they bombed the citys.
The sad reality of this is, that the usa wanted too test there bombs there thats why they sended after the surrender there Experts too these citys too Document what the bombs had done. It was just for test reason too see what these things do too humans and human citys.
That is the sad truth about the atomic bombing in ww2.
I know your country the US says it different, but ask japanese people that where alive back then and in comand and you get exactly what i told you now.
So please don't except the things your country says about it, look for the truth. You can't find the truth in the usa or other Western countrys, you only can find it when you Talk too people and learn it.
One big and only thing that allways is the truth is, that winners are writing the history nowone else. 😉😁
If you are really interested in history you learn this little but important Detail very fast. And today even more, because in todays time history is allways writen New so that people today getting the right message ( not the truth about it only the right message ) and viewed differently than it was at the time it actually happend. Just a short reminder from someone very interested in history his whole life. Because from history you can learn, but till today people around the world never learn.
One other thing that repeated itself a Million time in history is humans never ever learn, they have knowledge but they allways make the same mistakes over and over again even today, people never learn. They only learn from there own mistakes not from mistakes other people do, and mistakes humans in history has done. That is the sad reallity you come too know qhen you are really interested in the true history not the learned history.
Any sources to cite or is this one of those "do your own research" deals?
@@PhuckYT12 why ? this is comon knowledge now. you can look at interviews of war veterans from japan. most veterans from ww2 are dead by now only a few are still alive. could be hard too find some today. normaly such info is not found easily in todays world, because it says the truth. but you must look at more than one interview. this is time consuming and normaly people only want on page too look at not hundreds of pages. thats why i can`t post it here, first it would be too much and second youtube would ban me. sry you must find it for yourself.
like i said it is very time consuming, there is no one page or site on the interent too find it, there are many.
but i would advise you too not look at it, believe me too much knowledge in todays world is nothing people can have without losing something dear and if you are losing it it will never come back, the hole is deeper than you can think of and there are more lies than you can imagine.
one more advise the truth is in most cases nothing good, if you are an us american don`t look it up, it would destroy more than it brings you. there are more than just this information about the past thats terrifying too know for most people.
if you are happy in your life leave it like that and don`t think too much about it.
i already said too much sry.
better is too be blind about the reality and not knowing like most people, then knowing too much, because if you beginning too see you can`t look away anymore and you beginning too see more and more. There is no end too it when you start it and no going back anymore.
i know it and it is not a good thing because you can`t change anything about it. you helpless seeing things most of the people can`t.
this is just a warning nothing else.
everyone can do as they like.
Source : trust me bro
He is not even from USA.
"Because japanese have different version so its true"
@@Super-Godzilla99 Literally all I asked for was a source. Do you not know what it means to cite sources? I don't need you to copy and paste hundreds of pages, I need a fucking book title and author. Documentary title, interview name, etc.
What you've given me is further affirmation of my original belief that you're most likely speaking from your ass. 🤷🏽♂️
Should drop one on Putin - really
because Putin right now does exactly that thing he said 20 years ago when he stated that NATO should take their hands off Ukraine or the consequences will follow?
@@semiramisubw4864 Putin is a megalomaniac, comparable to only two historical personalities. One was Russian too, the other came from Austria.
A shame no one hasn’t assassinated him already, like everyone hoped for Trump too.
All communist countries should disappear from map. It would make world a better place
@Dead_clasher communists are the best when it comes to propaganda 😏
@Dead_clasher as long you are happy, I guess
ukraine would never been attacked if they still had nukes so who will ever again give up their nukes
Yeah , imagine trusting communists and giving away your best diplomatic card away to them.
If Ukraine really wanted to give nukes away they should have joined NATO years ago
Ukraine would never been attacked if they still not want to join nato