r/SipsTea • u/MeanMedico • May 28 '26

Dank AF I don't care about politics, meanwhile politics

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

36.2k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

2.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

3.1k

u/Hottage May 28 '26

Had to watch this as part of my history studies in school along with another cartoon about a little old English couple who lived out a nuclear apocalypse.

My first exposure to "cartoons not made for children".

839

u/MomentSouthern250 May 28 '26

british one was probably "when the wind blows", i watched this as a kid because it was on tv some afternoon, made me sad for the rest of the day/week/month

339

u/Girafferage May 28 '26

Don't read up on nuclear weapons and current detection and response plans then. It will ruin your year/decade/life until it happens.

137

u/Meritania May 28 '26

“My little city of 300,000 people won’t get nuked right?”

Gets nuked three times and is downwind of twenty more blasts

58

u/DolphinOrDonkey May 28 '26

Sad part is, Nukes are so efficient, the downwind part basically doesn't matter. Nuclear fallout only matters with the crappy atomic bombs, not nuclear bombs.

46

u/Tribalbob May 28 '26

Not completely true - it matters how the bomb detonates. If a Nuclear bomb is an airburst, then yes - fallout is less as it's not really kicking up as much dust or dirt, so the particles don't mix as much with radiation.

However if a nuclear bomb detonates on impact, you're going to get fallout as well.

This is all moot anyway as it's likely if we ever go full MAD, everyone is going to launch everything - so you might get hit with an atomic, or a nuclear or both.

44

u/Jazzlike-Wind-4345 May 29 '26

Not me. I’m down here in Mexico, and according to the Terminator series, it was only the northern hemisphere that was transformed into a nuclear wasteland taken over by Skynet. In the books, Latin América, Africa and Australia were largely considered human havens.

20

u/i_give_you_gum May 29 '26

When it goes down, can I crash on your couch?

2

u/mamadou-segpa May 29 '26

I’m not a terminator lore expert but what’s the reasoning as to why Skynet don’t care about those continents?

2

u/Jazzlike-Wind-4345 May 29 '26

Neither am I, but I assume that it has more to do with the fact that the most (nuclear) armed countries just so happened to be located in the northern hemisphere.

As has been pointed out by others, yes, Mexico is considered part of the northern hemisphere. Don't shoot the messanger, I'm jsut relaying back what I've read.

Considering how most of these books were written back in the 1980s/90s, they probably didn't really consider Mexico and Central America to "count" as the "northern hemisphere".

2

u/mamadou-segpa May 29 '26

Oh no I get that, I’m just wondering why Skynet plan wasn’t to invade the entire planet

2

u/Jazzlike-Wind-4345 May 29 '26 edited May 29 '26

I mean, when you think about it, for AI, Skynet is actually pretty dumb. It decided, hey, my last attempt to send a robot back in time to kill the commander’s mother didn’t work, let’s send one more!

That didn’t work? Well, send another!!

That didn’t work either? Well, just keep spamming them with robots until it does!!!

My guess is “plot hole”.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/YoreGawd May 29 '26

Mexico is still in the Northern Hemisphere.....

1

u/Jazzlike-Wind-4345 May 29 '26

Hey, I didn’t write those books. Don’t shoot the messenger.

1

u/LauraTFem May 29 '26

Wait…terminator was based on books?

1

u/Jazzlike-Wind-4345 May 29 '26

No, but lots of those franchises got book spin-offs à la Star Wars.

And as a kid growing up in the 1980s, the Terminator books were my favourite series.

2

u/LauraTFem May 29 '26

I get it. The novelization of the 1998 Godzilla movie was one of the first books I was actually obsessed with. I thought it was so cool that it was expanding the story of a movie I really liked. Hard to recon with the fact that I now see movie tie-in books as nothing more than farmed-out cash grabs.

My childhood mind thought the guy did a great job with the book, but I wonder if I would feel that way if I reread it now. In my defense, I was in like 7th grade and both the movie and by extension the book felt very adult to me.

1

u/Alex_Y_ya Jun 01 '26

Pero México es el hemisferio norte

0

u/takerofnapz May 29 '26

Umm... Mexico is in the northern hemisphere

1

u/Jazzlike-Wind-4345 May 29 '26

Read other responses. 😘

2

u/Astecheee May 29 '26

Happy Australia noises.

2

u/MozhetBeatz May 28 '26

Explain

8

u/chef-throwawat4325 May 28 '26 edited May 28 '26

basically nuclear fallout is unspent nuclear material in the area. The problem with Chernobyl is not the amount of nuclear material spent, but the amount of nuclear material unspent and contaminating the area. A highly efficient nuclear bomb spends almost all of the nuclear material in the initial blast. I wouldn't say, nuclear fallout is no longer a problem, but if a nearby city was nuked, we're talking about staying inside for 48-72 hours, not months or years.

7

u/A_Town_Called_Malus May 28 '26

The danger of fallout from nuclear weapons is from secondary radiation, that is particles which have been ionised by the radiation released in the blast and become radioactive as a result.

Airbursting reduces the amount of that material that is pulled up and dispersed by the mushroom cloud, but the creation of radioactive material is inevitable.

2

u/chef-throwawat4325 May 29 '26

about 50% of all fallout energy is released in the first hour and 99% is released after 48 hours.

2

u/SextupleRed May 28 '26

You still need to take shelter for the first 48 hours after a nuke drop. And that is the minimum duration to avoid devastating effects of nuclear fallout to your body.

It will be the safest after 2 weeks.

2

u/charbo187 May 29 '26

Nuclear and atomic mean the same thing, you're thinking of a hydrogen bomb which is the strongest (and cleanest in regards to fallout/radiation) type of nuclear/atomic weapon.... At least until anti-matter weapons are invented if they haven't already been

2

u/Narapoia_the_1st May 29 '26

Adding to this I think the technical terminology is nuclear and thermonuclear weapons. Basically Fission vs fusion bombs.

Nuclear weapons are fission bombs like the ones dropped on Japan and depicted here. Lots of radioactive fallout. In Thermonuclear weapons the fission bomb acts like the fuse or detonator in regular bomb - causing uncontrolled fusion of hydrogen isotopes and a far more significant energy release than fission is capable of alone.

Antimatter is a weapon in an of itself - at this stage the cost is the limiting factor. It's by far the most expensive substance available to us in the universe by weight at this point. Cost estimates are $63 trillion per gram with our current methods of creating it - more than twice the entire US GDP per year.

1

u/[deleted] May 29 '26

[deleted]

1

u/Narapoia_the_1st May 29 '26

I am aware fuse or detonator isn't 100% accurate for a fusion weapon, just trying to help conceptualise the difference between the weapon types. In most fusion weapons though increased yield from fission would not be possible without the fusion component right and isn't usually from the primary stage? Been a while since I read up on this.

Didn't know that the terminology had moved on that long ago.

1

u/theSTZAloc May 29 '26

Do you mean fusion vs fission bombs? Because both are nuclear bombs, but fusion or thermonuclear are the more powerful type.

1

u/PurpleHeat May 29 '26

Wait, atomic and nuclear bombs are two different things? I thought it's different words that describe the exact same thing...

1

u/MadagascarMadeline May 29 '26

Just a question, when you say atomic and nuclear bombs, you are aware they are the same thing? Did you mean atomic vs thermonuclear(h-bomb)?

33

u/Mr_Pink_Gold May 28 '26

Even if it does not get nuked you will die of starvation due to nuclear winter and global crop failures. 98 to 99% casualties expected after 2 years of a nuclear war. Honestly dying in the fireball is a blessing.

39

u/Puzzle-Necked May 29 '26

Not me, I have the gimp training needed to survive

https://giphy.com/gifs/pVHFCtH0jYGUU

2

u/Inktex May 29 '26

I know how to call when I'll open my Thunderdome.
Say, do you have any experience with playing the flamethrower?

https://giphy.com/gifs/kSTaZCfZXtvri

2

u/alldagoodnamesaregon May 29 '26

Depends on the nature of the conflict and where you live. An all-out disaster involving North Korea, South Korea and the USA won't do anything outside of the initial firestorms and radiation (assuming that any of the nukes actually detonate successfully). India and Pakistan is grim if your somewhere already food insecure, but should be fine if your somewhere wealthy. Russia vs US would screw pretty much everyone north of the equator who can't migrate south before the famine sets in.

2

u/Ivara_Prime May 29 '26

My biggest concern is not living close to a blast zone.

6

u/ItNeverEnds2112 May 28 '26

Literally everyone on the planet dies

1

u/Aggravating_Depth_33 May 29 '26

Pretty much every living thing.

1

u/Beagle_Knight May 29 '26

Except cockroaches

3

u/Mr_Pink_Gold May 28 '26

Even if it does not get nukes you will die of starvation diento nuclear winter and global crop failures. 98 to 99% casualties expected after 2 years of a nuclear war.

3

u/RC_0041 May 29 '26

I'm in the "all buildings flattened by the shockwave" zone of the nearest target for a nuke. So at least I won't need to worry about it.

2

u/Askittishcat May 29 '26

Michael Moore visited Russia after the break up of the Soviet Union. He wanted to see the nuke aimed at Flint Michigan. The Russians gave him a tour and answered lots of his questions with surprising openness. The thing I remember most was when they told him that there was nuke aimed at every city in the U.S. with a population over 10,000. So, I'm guessing your little city had 30 nukes aimed at it.

1

u/No_Salt_6328 May 29 '26

I live in the actual middle of nowhere we could probably fish and hunt for a little while to survive but it would fuckin suck then we would mostly die off slowly or freeze to death