Sujet : Re: And Spalls thinks COD is shallow
De : dtravel (at) *nospam* sonic.net (Dimensional Traveler)
Groupes : comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.actionDate : 21. Jul 2025, 15:45:06
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <105ljph$2sls1$2@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 7/21/2025 12:30 AM, JAB wrote:
On 19/07/2025 01:42, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
>
You haven't convinced me that every nation does this. I can understand America or even Russia doing this, but the lasting damage would be greater with "groundbursts"? A vindictive nation might not be so green- conscious. Do you think Iran cares which of the two they conduct with a nuclear strike, since they have to work so hard just to get the initial blast?
>
If you want to occupy the ruins, airburst. If you want to salt the land for 10,000 years, ground burst.
If you want real ground burst, in the 50's the British developed some prototypes for a nuclear mine. So literally bury them on the East Germany border and if the Soviets attacked then detonate them. The idea wasn't just to cause casualties but to deny a whole area as an avenue of advance due to the fallout.
As well as deny the Soviets a large number of new subjects.
-- I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky dirty old man.
And Spalls thinks COD is shallow
Re: And Spalls thinks COD is shallow