This theory is horribly cursed but I do not think they could carry it out without their usual hubs sounding off about it. The thinktanks and the various people of influence. They all do this through various channels.
If it were being seriously considered I do not think they could hide it as efficiently as is necessary. It would have to be the effort of like a very small group of 10-15 people otherwise and that group would have to include generals that would carry it out, the president, and several completely deranged neoliberal ghouls.
Israel does not have enough nuclear weapons to do this by itself either. Israel has an estimated 90 nuclear weapons and to be frank I think that's a high estimate. This idea would rely on someone else also firing nukes. The only possible partner is the US. But if the US fires nukes in conjunction with Israel it is burning itself on the world stage forever afterwards. People worldwide will not treat it like Japan.
It is very cursed, but I can’t help noticing the mainstream media pushing to normalize nuclear escalations in recent months.
This CSIS analysis from 2009 suggests that Israel does have more than enough yield in its nuclear arsenal to achieve the simulated impact. The climate model referenced above only needed 100 15-kiloton nukes (1.5 Megaton total) to achieve the effect of releasing 5 Tg of smoke into the atmosphere. According to the CSIS report, a single Jericho II ballistic missile alone can carry a 1000kg warhead of 1 Megaton yield. And that’s just a single warhead. So, probably 1-2 big nuclear explosions (or a dozen of smaller ones) are enough to irreversibly affect the global climate.
The difficult (and unbelievable) part of this hypothesis is how can they contain the nuclear explosions regionally and not allowing it to escalate out of hand towards a global thermonuclear war.
The difficult (and unbelievable) part of this hypothesis is how can they contain the nuclear explosions regionally and not allowing it to escalate out of hand towards a global thermonuclear war.
I think the obvious answer would be to egg on a situation where an exchange would be between a nuclear power and a non-nuclear power.
how can they contain the nuclear explosions regionally and not allowing it to escalate out of hand
the solution is clear, you just have to think (much) dumber and refocus from nuclear war as an excuse to the core of "exploding nukes will lower the global temperature"
Greenwashing Nuclear Weapons: USA paying countries to let them explode nukes in the desert to save the climate
Israel does not have enough nuclear weapons to do this by itself either.
Then again, It would be very on brand under-doing it so we just get nuclear fallout and radiation instead of the intended effect. Egged on by Christian Fascist/Zionists death drive, evangelical rapture prophesies and climate change denialists desperate to keep their treats. They already accepted that 100s of millions will die from climate change, what's a few 10s of millions more.
This theory is horribly cursed but I do not think they could carry it out without their usual hubs sounding off about it. The thinktanks and the various people of influence. They all do this through various channels.
If it were being seriously considered I do not think they could hide it as efficiently as is necessary. It would have to be the effort of like a very small group of 10-15 people otherwise and that group would have to include generals that would carry it out, the president, and several completely deranged neoliberal ghouls.
Israel does not have enough nuclear weapons to do this by itself either. Israel has an estimated 90 nuclear weapons and to be frank I think that's a high estimate. This idea would rely on someone else also firing nukes. The only possible partner is the US. But if the US fires nukes in conjunction with Israel it is burning itself on the world stage forever afterwards. People worldwide will not treat it like Japan.
It is very cursed, but I can’t help noticing the mainstream media pushing to normalize nuclear escalations in recent months.
This CSIS analysis from 2009 suggests that Israel does have more than enough yield in its nuclear arsenal to achieve the simulated impact. The climate model referenced above only needed 100 15-kiloton nukes (1.5 Megaton total) to achieve the effect of releasing 5 Tg of smoke into the atmosphere. According to the CSIS report, a single Jericho II ballistic missile alone can carry a 1000kg warhead of 1 Megaton yield. And that’s just a single warhead. So, probably 1-2 big nuclear explosions (or a dozen of smaller ones) are enough to irreversibly affect the global climate.
The difficult (and unbelievable) part of this hypothesis is how can they contain the nuclear explosions regionally and not allowing it to escalate out of hand towards a global thermonuclear war.
I think the obvious answer would be to egg on a situation where an exchange would be between a nuclear power and a non-nuclear power.
the solution is clear, you just have to think (much) dumber and refocus from nuclear war as an excuse to the core of "exploding nukes will lower the global temperature"
Then again, It would be very on brand under-doing it so we just get nuclear fallout and radiation instead of the intended effect. Egged on by Christian Fascist/Zionists death drive, evangelical rapture prophesies and climate change denialists desperate to keep their treats. They already accepted that 100s of millions will die from climate change, what's a few 10s of millions more.
Remember that we live in the dumbest timeline.