Is there any realistic way to effectively defend against nukes?

Either have significantly more nukes or infiltrate the education system of your opponent and slowly teach each generation to be more and more anti-nuke until the country willingly abandons them.

Have nukes of your own.

Be Turkish
Nukes won't affect you.

Have a (You) for your excellent post and rare flag, my Rwandan brother

I'm not actually Rwandan I'm a Rhodesian Exile selling arms to Rwandans so they can kill each other

Israel, cheeky

They can be shot down. It won't be perfect, the bomber always gets through, but good interception systems and a robust civil defense system will ensure those outside the immediate blast zones will have a very good chance of seeing tomorrow.

In addition to this, a nuclear exchange will not be country versus country. Sure China could dump all of its nuclear weapons on the US and slow us down, except now they're all out of nukes and have to deal with the militaries of the rest of the Western world including nuclear capable UK and France. So take the number of nukes, remove a sizeble chunk that got blown up in the atmosphere, you'll probably have some fail due to technical issues, now take the remainder and divide it up among not only viable targets in the US but also those in most of western Europe.

DUM DUM
DIDDLE DUM DUM
DIDDLE DUM DUM

Highly effective for preventing casualties due to flying debris and roof collapse in the moderate and light damage blast zones.

You're doing God's work Strelok.

I don't know. I don't think so unless you can create some manner of flak barrage using nukes, you know, since anti-ballistic missile systems can't really deal with that multiple warhead problem. Admittedly it wouldn't be realistic option at all.

Attack is best defense though, so you just have attack and kill your enemy, completely unprovoked so that they can't attack you with that much force later should things escalate.

Not piss off the people who own them. Otherwise the only option is placing anti-missile point defense systems along every country with nukes, and that would be considered an act of war.

god damn this fucking reddit meme needs to go away.

no one is about to throw away their GDP over some sand pit fight. fucking retards. i wish it though.

Subvert the enemy until they no longer consider you an enemy and take them out without a single fight.

Attached: vlcsnap-2017-02-16-11h00m00s670.png (1920x1090, 2M)

The most effective way to stop inbound nukes is to fire a nuclear missile at the incoming missile and detonate when they are very close.

The moment someone even begins to invent a realistic way to defend against nukes, every country that has nukes will launch them.

It's use them or lose them.

OK a few dozen nukes for EMP, shut down the entire western power grid, wipe every one and zero in every bank, and send us to the dark age for months.
A couple of hundred nukes in every major port and sea lock prevents imports and sea travel. Given the fact that we're a global society, a factory for a lightbulb filament is on one continent, while the factory for the socket is on the other continent, and the mine for resources are on a third continent… suddenly industry has to be restarted from scratch. No sea-locks and sea travel becomes ten times more difficult. No West protecting sea travel, piracy and opportunism by state actors resumes. We're probably going to slip back into mercantilism if not feudalism, and the rest of the world will follow. Hell most of it depends on us directly for aid and defense of their borders.
Worse yet no oil, fertilizer, food, medical care, or parts needed to repair the power grid. Making dark age status last years instead of months…. and introducing famine and disease not seen since the medieval ice age and black plague. Given the masses of people in cities and no access of food, people will have to resort to cannibalism to survive. At that point a nuke dropping on a megacity would be a blessing.
We haven't even hit 500 nukes yet already its hell on earth, and there are over ten thousand nukes.

People who shrug off nukes should be shot dead on sight, their stupidity makes them a danger to themselves and to the rest of us.

With what? ABM doesn't work.

Why are you in Trinidad?

makes sense, you do realize most nukes aren't big enough to actually make a port unusable right? and that the larger bombs are for bunker busting and prestige targets right? but of course you don't since you seem to think that a nation inventing nuke-proofing will result in some kind of international nuclear free for all. i mean, did you even proof read your post? the main reason we dont have great plagues is because of preventative sanitation, not fucking cures and treatments. and what in the fuck are you talking about no oil? even europe produces enough oil and fertilizer on its own to support agriculture, especially when you factor in contingency laws which allow government to ration. the main fucking reason europe has all the food is because we mine a shit ton of fertilizer chemicals from within europe. also where the fuck is this 10k nukes figure coming from? do you actually think there are 14 thousand warheads capable of intercontinental reach? such a deceitful position, even if you factor in an exchange between russia+china vs USA the actual deliverable nukes is still sub 4k. again why is the scenario in your mind a giant global battle royale of nukes? who benefits? and even then major ports dont mean shit, most major ports handle mainly bulk consumer goods, its the minor ports which handle the transfer of industrial supplies and raw materials. Theres so much wrong with your reply im baffled trying to respind to it all. do you even know how useless explosions are at destroying factory machinery? just because it's a nuke doesn't mean that everything in the radius of damage gets vaped, only a very small area (the size of one large factory) gets vaporized to the point it cant be salvaged from.

Tell them that you'll kill them just as dead if they use them.

Attached: i-swear-to-god-ill-kill-us-all-if-you-4254413.png (500x307, 33.62K)

Nope. There isn't. The US doesn't actually have any sort of effective ICBM deterrent or defence, especially against MIRV type weapons. Once a missile is in the air, it's all over and there is no realistic way to stop it.

What about the casaba howitzers DARPA looked into?

Your disagreement has a good chance of killing me, so yeah I'd rather you die first.

As for the rest…. a 15kt nuke didn't just wreck a port, it wrecked a major port CITY in world war two. Hiroshima was a massive embarkation port, and Nagasaki was one of the largest shipbuilding centers in Japan. Both irradiated into uselessness for more than a generation, it wasn't until 1966 that they rebuilt the city. The nukes in use by world powers start at 10x that and go up to 100x that.

STAY IN SCHOOL.

Attached: ground center monument.jpg (1000x242, 83.97K)

I get the sentiment but subjecting someone to more public education is going to have the opposite effect.

Attached: US Army Korea Era 75 mm Gun, M51, Antiaircraft _Skysweeper_.mp4 (472x434 1.86 MB, 28.33K)

prove there was damage to the actual docks, from which cargo actually flows. prove that you cant just wait a week and flush the cesium into the ocean. also it's good to know your still a lying faggot.
nothing you've said discounts my positions. all larger bombs will be used on national capitols, nuke bases, and deep facilities. all lesser bombs will be used on active military assets to prevent or aid invasion. there will not be random plagues, no one will starve, the deterrence to nuclear war was never MAD but instead the prospect of continuation war. if you're terified of life after nukes you should kill yourself now, they exist, they will be used and they dont give a shit how scary you think they are.

Be a terrorist/guerilla hiding in civilian populations. The US could've won the War on Terror on day one if it had the stones to go for nuclear retaliation after 9/11.

Attached: How to solve problems.jpg (564x439, 19.76K)

Have your nuke-capable enemies' economies financially dependent upon you. No politician is going to knowingly shoot himself in the wallet, and his local interest groups will shoot him in the head if he's stupid enough to try.

They were studies written in the 1910s that said a large war in Europe is impossible, because all countries are economically interdependent.

I was born here tbqhf
Why the weird question?

Effective civil defense would neutralize much of the effect of a nuclear strike. It would make the cost of retaliation too high to initiate a first strike.

unrealistic to expect this of the neocons it wouldve meant nuking israel.

Attached: NEOCON SONG.webm (1280x720 7.95 MB, 6.74M)

Obligatory wargame RD shitpost
Someone explain the steel division joke because I don't play it

Fucking can't embed hooktube for some reason.

Unit spam if I recall.

What about some kind of drone… on a missile? The done basically saws the crap out of the missile with some or complete human guidance and either redirects the missile or disables the warhead.

Also this.

Polite sage, but… my idea would have absolutely no bearing on hyper-velocity gliders.. but maybe on some of the older missiles.

while we have the capability it's not all that likely that we'd actually succeed in hitting them midair. We fail on testing somewhat regularly and that's when we know when and where they're coming from. Let alone if they came from a surprise attack.