Would a nuclear attack that doesn't involve America or Russia

>>32665034
>two of the three of those conflicts involve US allies

>>32665067

You think America would EVER authorize a nuclear response against anything that didn't involve American soil?

I don't think any nation would side with the nuclear aggressor. Whoever launches nukes first would be in the shitter, politically. It would be more like "The World vs This Guy" instead of World War

>>32665034
Nuclear weapons don't exist.

File: Tumbler_Snapper_rope_tricks.jpg (90KB, 922x852px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 922x852px

>>32665155

Conventional weapons can't make explosions with rope tricks, retard.

>>32665093
>What is Western Europe

>>32665093

Yes

>>32665201

And no nation besides Russia would attack Western Europe with nukes, so it still applies to my Russia/America limit I put in the OP.

Even then, I very much doubt Americans would respond with nukes if the Russians attacked ONLY Western Europe and stopped there (not that is a realistic scenario anyways, they'd attack America as well, making the question moot)

>>32665210

You're a fool then.

>>32665225

You're a double fool, fool man.

>>32665236

Fine then, you're assuming that in two of the three cases I pointed out, nuclear Armageddon occurs anyways, as the Americans use nukes to turn what was going to be a limited exchange into a global one as any America launch will see instant Russian launches as well, an action America undertakes for the SAKE OF NON-AMERICAN LIVES AND SOIL

What about the third case I pointed out?

File: B-52G_with_AGM-86B_ALCMs.jpg (1MB, 2820x1850px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2820x1850px

>>32665093

>Article V: The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

why do you think Perishing and GLCM existed? why do you think british nuclear weapons are included in the SIOP?

while not part of NATO the Sorks are close US allies and I can't see the US reacting timidly if fatboy drops nuclear and chemical weapons on US/SK troops(I can see B-52Gs from guam repeating what they did to saddam but with nuclear not conventional ACLMs this time)

>>32665285

There's a reason I kept NATO scenarios out of the op

>>32665298

>South Korea is a US ally
>the US stations troops on Korea and will defend SK from northern attack
>north korea attacks US/SK troops with nuclear and chemical weapons

do you really think the US would treat it any different than a nuclear attack on the 7th fleet at Yokosuka?

>>32665264
not him, but you sound childish. Such actions would destroy their economy from sanctions which might as well be a full on blockade. No one would do business with China if they nuked Taiwan kid. Go back to playing League of Legends and get the fuck off this board.

>>32665034
hurr durr, what if America like nuked all of mexico, what would happen? Would Russia respond? Or would they be like lol, pointless attack with nuclear weapons, whole world disagree and say fuck u merica lol.


or does this scenario warrant a psychologist to determine if I have autism?

>>32665629
>hurr durr, what if America like nuked all of mexico, what would happen?

Irradiated Mexico

>Would Russia respond?

I'm sure they'd have something to say, but respond with nukes? Doubt it.

>Or would they be like lol, pointless attack with nuclear weapons, whole world disagree and say fuck u merica lol.

Something along those lines, certainty.

File: pot.jpg (2MB, 3000x2514px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3000x2514px

>>32665624

>No one would do business with China if they nuked Taiwan
>Calling others childish

Pottery

>>32665666
>>32665650
pathetic samefag OP.

>>32665685

I responded to two different posts, what's the matter with that?

>>32665698
pathetic excuse to bump chink. First reply is obviously pathetically taken out of context. Worthless chink strikes again.

>>32665710

You don't think it would be interesting to discuss the possibilities of limited nuclear conflict outside of the cliched cold war narrative?

>>32665742
>possibilities of limited nuclear conflict outside of the cliched cold war narrative?
I think it would but I see no possibility in the Taiwan conflict other than nuking American Naval assets which brings us back to cold war narratives. There is no reason to use nuclear weapons against Taiwan. Its complete overkill and a stupid scenario. Its like discussing if we would nuke Texas if they left the Union. Conventional war would be sufficient and nuclear war just some edgy kids pathetic dream.

North Korea on South Korea is never going to happen unless the populace becomes rebellious to the point where the regime has nothing to lose.

India and Pakistan I have no idea because I'm not familiar with the politics but nuclear exchange is a big deal and still don't see it happening. I'm 100% sure your some chink or Australian shit poster bumping his shitpost thinking he has something important to say but your autism is preventing you from understanding how dumb the whole idea is, at least in you scenarios.

>>32665034
>>India/Pakistan exchange

Pakistan doesn't have nukes

>>32665796
>Pakistan doesn't have nukes

Anon, at least Google the answer if you don't know.