Greetings from a small medieval university town in the UK, located 23 miles from Lakenheath, 52 miles from Felixstowe, 48 miles from Sovereign House, and about 57 miles from the Equinix Data Centre in Slough. If any of the described things happen, I'm so sorry that I won't be able to visit Moscow and St Petersburg, as those cities would cease to exist.
225 warheads currently, and enough time and detection to launch well before any 1st strike weapons land. Unlikely they can take out all the subs before most launch
@@andrasferencz7948 But if you did, could you talk about it publicly. Kinda like if you worked in N. Yorkshire Menwith Hill. If the missiles come for England, your cousins across the pond got your back.
True I thought about that too. If they take out their warning system what stops them from assuming more nukes are coming right?? Realistically that would make them assume the worst
The UK's nuclear defense isn't in the form of ground silos but a many nuclear trident submarines at sea, if you attack, you will get killed, as is the case with all form of nuclear offensives
@@dogsnads5634 Not might, would, definitely. Mind there is an upside. There'd be no problem parking anywhere in Russia. It'd just be one huge car park.
@@beepboop9848 That was the modus operandi of the cold war. If one of the early warning radars would be targeted the rest of the world would have burned. You can only assume the worst when you are blinded and its your survival on the line.
I work in immingham port, where i am sitting right now i am within 2 miles of: 2 huge oil refineries, 2 gas terminals, millions of tons of explosive fertiliser, 3 power stations, 2 chemical manufacturing plants, inorganic gas plant, multi million cubic meters of stored liquid gas, petroleum, kerosene, millions of tons of wood pellets and coal, not to mention the local RAF base, i honestly think they'd target my actual office.
Not to mention RAF Waddington in Lincoln we have always had this. But in WW2 Russian comrades saved my Scottish Veteran Dad. He'd be livid that USA have gone mental gone mental again.
@@RyanMcBethProgramming Ryan at the end of the video you forgot Thomas Cochrane, that mofo was a savage and very underrated haha. But great but not (wanted in a way) video, would be cool if you could make a target list on other countries.. hope it comes to it tho
@@RyanMcBethProgramming Play fair Ryan!...If you are going to do a "Where dem nukes go UK" vid, then you have to give one to Sheffield because of the classic feel good movie of the century "Threads"...And if its those Rooskies doing it then it has to get TWO, Respect the classics!
You could completely vaporise the entire U.K., but I can guarantee you that there would be at least one bloke who was in the pub toilet having a piss at the time and missed the whole thing, who would come out, pour himself a free pint and the crack on with tidying this whole mess up.
It would be a Geordie and he would probably have 4 or 5 pints of Newcastle brown before coming to the conclusion that it was down to him to invade Russia. ( God help the Russians when he gets there. A Geordie kiss is nothing to be laughed at )
If there were two blokes in different pubs a mile apart, they'd bumb into each other and say "alright mate, what's going on" and the reply would be "not much mate, same old shit, eh?"
Grew up about a 15 minute drive from Stanlow, was told my whole life that it was a nuclear target. Good to know it's still got what it takes to make the list.
They started decommissioning Shell Stanlow in 1985, my dad got retired off early so I am told now by the Shell pensioners guy who goes to see my old mother the place is all but just land in some places they are still burning gas off.
Couple years ago I have red how people in the sixties were convinced that the nuclear war was imminent and I thought "Luckily this was a thing from the past. Nothing like that can happen now" And now we are here
And like them, its all but garunteed to happen. The only reason nuclear war didn't happen was because of one or two men in the right place at the right time. Such men no longer exist in this era. Stock up on clean water and food, and have an escape plan.
As a millennial raised by baby boomers, I would always tell people that we could be right back into those Cold War drills and stockpiling iodine tablets, but nobody listened until now
@@Igor_lvanov I've been prepping for the better part of a decade, 2014 was a crazy year for geopolitics. My wife and I farm and live in Dayton, with a full root cellar "bomb shelter" style basement in a 1919 house. Dayton would be a probable target for American incoming. Never far from my mind. Part of the reason why I am so active on UA-cam shooting down misinformation and rallying the public support for Ukraine. We are on this channel because we value the lifestyle of the warrior. Prepping for life after nukes is one thing, but prepping for honorable death is the essence. Part of the reason I took refuge in Tibetan Buddhism. Death is a realm of total enlightenment's possible understandings, and if one accepts the ever present nature and embraces it knowingly, in dying we may truly be alive.
@@FarmerDrew Actually I have lived my whole life in Moscow, Russia, but I am a Jew, so after the beginning of the war in Ukraine I moved to Israel. One of the reasons for that decision was the fact that I no longer felt safe in Moscow because it would be the primary target in case of the nuclear war
Just remember the UK has at least 1 (but probably 2 at this point in time) nuclear submarines of its 4 armed and ready at all times. That's 8-16 missiles with up to 80 nukes ready to launch. If Russia nuked London it wouldn't just stop there, Moscow would be destroyed/St Petersberg levelled along with other parts of Russia. If they nuke the UK I don't think the old empire would just sit back and say "you win". Unfortunately it would probably mean the whole world ends. Great video by the way 👍
It's also worth mentioning that they're armed, ready, and often no-where near the UK. You can't take them out by nuking the ports etc, they're already out there. You'll never know where. So they will come back. And if the orders are to launch, they will get you.
They don't even need direct orders there's a letter in a safe on every British SSBN of what to do in the event the UK gets nuked. There are only 4 real options, do nothing and join up with allide forces , full nuclear response to hi value targets, limited response and join allies or act at your own discretion.
@@mikewade777 God no. It's next to friendly nations, no way would they hit there first. May as well take out power structure etc as there's not enough nukes to go round, so they'd hit St Petersburg to take out that and the docks, and Moscow.
The only rational response to a limited strike is to neutralize the threat in full. If a guy shoots you in the arm, you don't just hope that's the end of it, and you don't shoot him in the arm so he understands that you are capable of defending yourself. You have to assume that he intended to kill you and missed, and you make sure that he never gets the opportunity to take a second shot.
If I'm right, the U.K. always has at least 1 Ballistic Missile sub somewhere in the ocean at all times. Each one has 40 warheads, capable of levelling large areas of Russia. If the U.K. is ever targeted with a nuclear strike, you can bet that sub will be launching soon after.
I wonder how much counter attack would be done, obviously UK would fire back, but how much would US fire back? We'd have the capacity to wipe Russia off the map, but how much damage would we cause?
@@hejalll I always assumed that the response to the use of any type of nuclear warhead on a friendly nation was a unilateral full arsenal counter strike. I could be wrong in term of real world application but i always thought that was the theory. Even if the allies of the UK don't openly launch, I can't imagine the UK would withstand a nuclear strike and not not launch in full force back even if it's alone
It’s not 40 per sub anymore, it went way up when Boris became PM and went higher when Russia started threatening the UK. But the government won’t say how many
@@kurtsell8376 The only logical decision if you're going to fire one missile is fire them all and hope you cripple your enemy. "If I send 10 and there's a 1% c\hance they respond with full force I had better send everything first."
That's just for the launch. It's unlikely that those missiles make landfall, possibly if Russia uses It's entire (on paper 🤷♂️) air-launched capacity, that a few missiles make it through, but even that's a gamble on their part. This is also assuming we know nothing ahead of time and only UK forces move to intercept. It's possibly the stupidest move at Putin's disposal, so I do kinda see why Ryan would want him to try it 😂
Russia isn't that stupid. They know if they even look at the UK wrong that the US will show up with everything we've got. It wouldn't even get to that point. We would act preemptively. While Russia was even thinking about it the US would F#*@ them up. Simple as that.
I have no doubt that my fellow Americans would absolutely lose their minds with retaliatory rage if the UK was attacked. The United Kingdom has one of the strongest relationships with the US imaginable.
My dad always told me that as a kid, his greatest fear was nuclear war. The idea that everyone, everything you love could be erased just like that. I sit here in disbelief that 40 years later, the same existential threat has returned to the minds of our generation. Shocking... EDIT: I never said the threat was ever not there over those 40 years, I meant the paranoia of nuclear war has returned to public consiousness on a level far greater than the 90s, 00s and 10s.
@@jackx4311 Someone on another page here says this ''Make no mistake, the US leadership elite is trying to get the UK nuked. It wants the European economy collapsed, and it wants to use the UK as it’s sacrificial lamb to destroy Russia and vice versa. Why? It’s all very simple. Europe wants to create a Euro army independent of NATO. If that happens Europe can rival the US in military might, and there’s the added fear it will form a pact with Russia. That means US hegemony over Europe and the Eastern Atlantic will be compromised. What you people don’t understand, the USA deliberately (and secretly) started WW1 & WW2 because it wanted its tentacles on the shipping lanes of the Atlantic and Pacific. These trade lanes form the bedrock of the US economy, and what makes it a superpower. Anyway, It first did this by secretly beefing up the German economy and industry to build the Wehrmacht, as it knew the UK would go to war with any rival. It’s worth noting: America was considering launching an assault on the Brit Empire under War Plan Red, but realising it would be too risky, they got the Germans to - unwittingly - fire the bullet instead. Long story short, as Europe was on its knees in war debt, the US sent occupational troops on a cleaning up exercise, and ever since the US has controlled Europe. And same with the imperial power that was Japan - the US kept goading them with economic embargo’s, so they were left with no other option but to attack - precisely what the US wanted, so it could then retaliate, defeat Japan, occupy the country (and later the majority of South East Asia), and dominate the Pacific shipping lanes. If anyone thinks that happened by accident, then I have some sea front property in Birmingham you might like to buy. Regardless, the US leadership elite are total and utter psychopaths; they were never our allies, and only have their troops / bases in our countries to keep our military / political activities under surveillance, and to keep us enemies of Russia. So, yes, the plan is for the UK and Russia to destroy eachother, while the US sits back and revels in its twisted accomplishments.'' What do you think??
The U.K. counter attack is not affected by any brief decision making pause based on launching only two missiles. The U.K.'s entire nuclear deterrent is submarine based, it cannot be prevented from responding. There is always at least one Trident submarine at sea.
Live in Portsmouth, work next to Fawley…tbh having done NBC training when I was a soldier in the 90’s, I wouldn’t want to survive. But I don’t think any country would stop the UK from responding in kind.
If the Russians nuke us, we won't be able to respond. Anyway, they wouldn't nuke us directly, they would hit the sea around the isles to create a huge tidal wave. There wouldn't be much left.
I agree. A limited attack makes the enemy vulnerable to overwhelming retaliation. To stand a chance of avoiding that, the pre-emptive strike would need to be overwhelming. That said, the escalatory ladder has many rungs. If Russia used tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine, any NATO response would likely be severe but conventional, at least at first. I imagine they would try to take out Russia's strategic nuclear capability, although locating all their nuclear subs would be difficult, so they'd have to focus on land based silo's and rely on satellite data to track mobile cruise missiles. In any case, the moment a WMD is used in Ukraine the landscape changes changes beyond recognition.
It’s a cheesy and overused statement but it’s true that the world is becoming more and more divided and unprepared for war, especially the west. It is potentially feasible that a limited nuclear strike could happen without the immediate reaction of a return strike
Only mentals and yanks think that. I imagine there will be some along in a moment to tell you how it could be so. Once the first one gets used in anger, all bets are off.
I wrote a letter to Stanislav Petrovs kid once... no idea if it ever made it to her, but I just wanted to say thank you from an American who was 4 years old the day that her father spared my life. That man should have an international holiday celebrated in his name.
Stanislav Petrov Day is the 26th of September each year. For obvious reasons, it was observed more widely in 2022 than earlier years. I don't think it's a national holiday anywhere, but you can take the day off work if you like. I understand the traditional way to commemorate Petrov's restraint is to find a large red button and refrain from pressing it.
Life in Grimsby is bad enough. Living with the cerebrally challenged, fishy smells, etc etc but Immingham (where George Smiley was going at the end of Tinker Tailor) being within 10 miles just puts the icing.....
The UK has an independent nuclear deterrent. In other words a limited nuclear attack as you describe against the UK would result in an automatic retaliation against the aggressor. It doesn't matter what the rest of the world decided to do, the UK would have nothing to loose by using all of it's limited nuclear strike force .
Yes, it might be a mistake to attack UK in a "limited" way, as UK is so small that the retaliation would have to include both Moscow and St. Petersburg. That would be the only proportional response. So not a clever move by Putin.
@@patrikfloding7985 Absolutely, whatever capability we had is already paid for so why not unleash it all at once. About 225 submarine tridents would give good coverage. Might as well do Russia's allies at the same time to help our allies out
@@patrikfloding7985 even if the UK decides not to retaliate, that doesn’t mean this is over. The US and UK would judge Putin to be an existential threat on par with Hitler and gear for total war, set up blockades, etc. The mistake we keep making in warfare is that the other side will be too horrified by the brutality and give in. This rarely happens. This is why diplomacy is so important. It is distressing this ukraine war continues without any peace talks ongoing. Did Putin decide on this course of action alone or with consultation from the CCP? Why are there no peace talks? It costs nothing to talk.
@@Greg-yu4ij every Dictator that has been given 'peace talks' actually sees them as 'appeasement' and goes on to commit worse. Dictators are NOT democracies and can not be treated as such. By mere definition, the population under such dictator has no say in anything and, in most cases, professes no interest for fear of personal death (any hope is some hope!). There is only one way to deal with Dictators - absolute removal. The problems with that solution is that it then leaves a power vacuum in their country! And that can be somewhat interesting in itself. However, the removal of said Dictator usually results in a few years of respite for the rest of the world.
The warheads are independent, though since electing to utilise only US Trident missiles for delivery, the deterrent requires US co-operation. Just as the F-35B operation require the US not to have sent a kill code to the platform. To quote the first Google Snippet: "The United Kingdom does not own its own missiles, but has title to 58 Trident SLBMs from a pool of missiles shared with the United States Navy."
As a British citizen who has been on antidepressants for a long time this has really cheered me up. Much in the same way Watching Watership Down as a 5 year old cheered me up 😂🤣
@@MrJamiez very true.. all they do is keep you addicted so they can make money from the situation .. rather than teaching people how to overcome depression... The right foods , exercise. Setting small goals that can be achieved , and other stuff to keep the mind busy.... Depression is just a state of mind , once the causes are identified . You can actually change how your mind thinks and works ... But it does take time and practice.
There's one detail you've missed out, the UK's nuclear submarines. There is _always_ one at sea & hidden so there's some overlap with 2 at sea & hidden as the shifts change over. The thing with these boats is that they run radio-silent, they just listen on a pre-determined schedule, they're listening for coded instructions & they're listening for a specific phrase on BBC's World Service. I have no idea what instructions are available but I expect it would be a very limited set of options, maybe as little as "change to target set B" & "fire now". The interesting one is the BBC signal. It's just an 'all clear' but if it becomes absent the submarine is _required_ to assume that Britain is lost & a full barrage from all tubes is launched in a retaliatory strike on targets determined before the boat sets out to sea. The target set might be several months out of date at the time of launch.
Not only the subs but the UK has territory all of the world do you think the UK has all its eggs in one basket. I guarantee the uk has nukes scattered all over its territories. Russia would face the full wrath of the UK if they attacked with nuclear weopons. Russia would definitely be destroyed but due to the fact the UK has territory everywhere it would survive. So all Russia would achieve is its assured destruction.
@@UpinsmokeXVI Yes. We probably would - or the US, being our ally. But it wouldn't only be the end of Russia, it'd be the end of all of us. So either way, we lose.
The problem with this is that it assumes that England would not react and target Russian airfields, nuclear silos, and submarines in a preemptive strikes. MI-6 would probably have a idea the attack was coming a few hours before it happens. Russian chatter is very easy to pick up on, and the Royal navy has been tracking the Russian baltic fleet for years.
And also it is would be an incredibly huuuuge political risk for Putin both from within the country and from other countries who are still neutral, like China and India
Here's what a lot of people dont understand. Corruption in russia has made it sooooo easy for MI6 and the CIA to recruit russians and get all kinds of juicy details about their communications, etc. We basically know everything they're doing in real time. That's how the US knew the invasion was going to happen, down to the minute.🤷♂️
Even better: take out all their oil fields, refineries, pipelines, all their fossil fuel infrastructure. And send wave after wave of assassins to execute Putin.
As an American, I really try to take this seriously, but all I can do is inwardly laugh because the Russians threatening nuclear anything just makes me think of Dexter from Dexter's laboratory saying the word " *Nuclear* " just to sound cool
Check out the 1984 film Threads. It was well researched. Not easy to watch, especially if you lived through the 80s and lived in the city it was set in.
It was likely just atrocity fear pr0n from the establishment, delivered to the public via their propaganda machine the BBC. I remember watching Threads as a teen in the 80s, but obviously I did not understand much about the ins and outs of it all. However I now realise we fought the wrong enemy in WW2.
Living in the UK and watching your summary of a Russian attack the thought doesnt sit easy with me. But I do believe we wouldn't just sit back and take it. I was in Scotland recently and watched one our nuclear deterrent submarines heading out to sea, just by pure luck in the right place at the right time. It was sort of reassuring in a strange way, let's just hope the deterrent force is stronger and remains the prevention and not the retaliation.
There is NO way Russia can use a nuclear weapon against a NATO country and expect Moscow to not be completely destroyed by a retaliatory hydrogen bomb.
The UK Government take orders from the EU they all want WW3 it's part of their planned agenda,I was warned 2yrs ago to get out of the UK as it's not on the 2023 census or map,the EU also planned to flood the UK with millions of immigrants before then,the Royal Family her Ministers & Government all committed treason by signing 5+ EU treaties since 1998.
Watched this as the afternoon Sun glinted off the Clyde, and in the distance the top of the ship (submarine) lift at Faslane at the top of the Gareloch, so adds more than a touch of reality to the viewing experience. An excellent analysis although given some of the surrounding population centres I fear that casualty estimates would be much higher (including myself). Although equally as John Hackett argued in his seminal book “The Third World War” Fylingdales and HMNB Clyde, might be the last places they would strike for fear of escalating an all out NATO response in return. Another of this ridiculous wars tragedy’s is that we are again debating this 40 years after he raised that same question. Thanks again for a sobering but insightful video.
@@markwierzbicki5307 Have it on my desk for the latest uncountable read. Falling apart at the binding, still very relevant. That and Team yankee although T.Y needs a rewrite now..
@@jeffho1727 Hi from a retired RCT/ RLC, I see you are Ruin Everything Mechanical Eventually. LOL. I won't give too many gigs as two of my nephews served / are serving REME. Stay safe buddy!
@@markwierzbicki5307 Tanker?? Lol. Some of the Corps best friends. Job security and appreciated. Im well retired now, living the life of a gentleman. Hope its all good for you as well. Edit BTW, show my avatar to your nephews. I am a colonial RCEME...
Growing up during the cold war was this fun every day. Returning to college later in life and majoring in Russian allowed me to study many things in depth that I only saw one-sided as a child. Studying in Russia in 2009 allowed me to apply my studies and skills to develop my own impressions of everything. That was a different time and I am grateful to have taken that leap and to have seen and experienced what I did in that time. Where we are now has only reinforced my belief that humans rarely learn and that lack of learning costs the lives of masses on the whims of a few. Thank you Ryan for using the hammer of knowledge against the sickle of evil!
Когда они создали закрытую систему типа кгб, которая не подчиняется никому и никак не эволюционирует, а наоборот. Именно тогда они создали предпосылки для событий 2008-2030. Предпосылки для всеобщей дозволенности действий и с серьезным лицом, но красным носом в кармане
@@alanhat5252 "When they created a closed system like the KGB, which does not obey anyone and does not evolve in any way, but vice versa. It was then that they created the prerequisites for the events of 2008-2030. Prerequisites for the general permissibility of actions and with a serious face, but a red nose in his pocket" I don't know, I think you can get the general sense of it. Michael presents the KGB as an example of a system that does not learn, one that has set the behaviour of Russia on its inevitable downward slide into tragicomic farce.
@@Ethaarus - OK snowflake? Your brand of retardation is the reason Britain is in the position it is. Whatever will you do when other nations don't Compliment you.
As a proud citizen of the UK (and firmly in the prevailing fallout zone of Lakenheath!) It's nice to see a reasonably well-informed analyst agreeing with my own thoughts on the matter. As a child of the cold-war it's something I've put a fair amount of thought into, and have come to very similar conclusions. I've also concluded that it's an unlikely scenario, as it's not a conflict that russia could win, they're simply not capable of resisting a NATO that's really pissed-off! As far as the resilience of the British people goes, you're right, while we might seem meek and mild to many outsiders, there's a steely stubbornness that's been the demise of many foes.
Every sub captain in the UK has a letter in the safe that determines their action in case of communication breakdown. A lot is speculated what is in these letters, but it makes sense that it goes in line of, confirm there was a nuclear attack, confirm the origin, empty your entire arsenal, then report back to the closest friendly naval base.
Russia would assume this as well so logically "limited" nuclear war will not be a thing. You use everything you have since a nuclear armed enemy will retaliate that way anyway . Hopefully the Dead Hand automated salted weapons systems son;t work. If that is used , for a few hundred years the only winners will be flour beetles
At the height of the Cold War, there were 200 nuclear warheads targetted at the UK. Are you telling me that cities like Swabnsea, Cardiff etc were not on that list? Think again boyo!
Thank you sir ! ( I'm a Brit living in washington D.C ) Yes, Britains nuclear deterrent in in fully under "sovereign", that is, totally under British control. Even though our nuclear SLBMs are American made. Britain is the only country which enjoys this "special relationship" with the USA. An interesting note....... Each time a new prime minister is elected in the UK, their first duty is to write a letter to the captains of our 4 nuclear submarines in the case of conflict, and subsequent "loss of contact" with the government. Ryan, you should research this. And yes, Britain would respond, likely with a full strike package.
Each week the captains enter the launch codes as a practice. They have their fingers crossed that the PM is not entering his/her codes at the same time -- but they don't actually know. This means they have no capability of countermanding a political decision to launch, and they can feel absolved of any moral responsibility if it's for real. They're just doing what they do every Tuesday. (Before you ask, it isn't always on a Tuesday.)
Got to admit, I'm from the central belt Scotland, this does sound chilling. Also motivates me to take up arms against Russia anyway I could.(Although it would be pointless in a nuclear scenario)
There needs to be a reason to use them first. If just messing up a country is your goal then great, but that doesn't help them win a war in Ukraine. Currently UK aren't actively in the war and neither are NATO, but they would be if they even tried to launch a missile against NATO.
Solid assessment. Now you should discuss the potential NATO response. You and I know that NATO has already war gamed this and many other scenarios. While we're at, how closely are you monitoring the key indicators of Russia's intent?
cold war era generals are creaming their pants right now. It's like someone who went to school for 20 years on some esoteric, nearly useless subject suddenly gets called into action and is suddenly relevant.
Many people thing that in government agency are some magic happen and they always know everything. But in reality they DONT..was NATO calculation that when they attack Lybia will fall in civil war that will never end..or did USA calculate that Kabul will fall in one day...i can do this all day
@@r.d.9399 nor the world, and certainly not Britain, there will be nothing left alive in the UK.... Russia has more nukes than USA (China not even included and they will certainly not support the US)
The fact that you prepared such a detailed and realistic video about Russia's nuclear attack on the UK shows how extraordinary days we are going through.
So far Russia has still not launched a single conventional missile or bomb against one NATO target despite the west supplying huge weaponry to the Ukraine. Why do we think it is like that?
@@Aldarion65 I'm about 25 miles from Fawley and 37 miles from Portsmouth Naval Base, and Ryan says they should just be air bursts, so hopefully won't be too bad. I'll keep my head down for the explosion, then have a strong cup of tea, with biscuits of course, and carry on as normal.
@@tonyr4873 Being from the North Bank of the River Humber; if Russia decides to send all of its nukes to Immingham/Grimsby, then that's absolutely fine by us... It's not that we "hate" our Southbank neighbours, it's just that most of those other targets are so picturesque and populated with nice friendly people... North East Lincolnshire... Erm... Well they do have some good fish & chip shops I guess 😬 Edit: I'm fully aware of the irony that someone living near Hull actually posted the above 🤣
The fact that he seriously thinks that Russia would wish to nuke the UK, over a military operation to take the territory that Russia has held for 2 years already is hilarious
Don't forget in the 1930s the British Government were appeasing the Germans, hadn't begun militarization and were by many expected to come to some sort of agreement with the Germans.
Wars and killing have never solved any damned thing. The idea that people are even thinking this way shows jut how broken we all are. Human race certainly needs to heal!
Ryan this video really sent chills down my spine. We're talking end of civilization here. I believe Albert Einstein said I know not what weapons WW3 will be fought with, but WW4 will be fought with Stick's and Stone's.
Looking at it from a dispassionate scientific standpoint, I remember that anthropologists discovered chimpanzee tribes going to war against one another, when population pressure was high and resource abundance was low. I imagine there are specific genes that are activated under these conditions, and we probably inherited those same genes.
100% agree, Kevin... I cannot believe that we're living in such a situation. Unfortunate that Russia does not realize their economy would've foster if they would've seek for collaborations. Instead of fighting / destroying one another on a planet as beautiful as Earth, we should focus on the survival of mankind and help one another.
@@busterkeyl Russia has threatened recently to do that, 'sinking' the UK and completely innocent Ireland. I'm not sure they realise islands aren't floating...
The UK has a nuclear capability and would respond. I don’t think it’s a likely target on that basis. Interesting thought experiment though; albeit a terrifying one!
if russia would fire even one missile at the UK entire of Nato would be Involved remember article 5, it would literally be World War 3 abd russia can't be that stupid to acctually do that
I have a British friend who lives in City of Plymouth, home of Devonport, Western Europe's largest naval base and Britain's only facility to refit and refuel their nuke sub fleet. He was surprised that Plymouth was omitted from your strike list and also suggested that if it was targeted, several million pounds worth of improvement would be done.
I'd like to request RAF Boulmer be re-added to the list, with a polite request to avoid Mondays or Thursdays. I'd also appreciate it if the FBI (Fishing Boat Inn) could be spared the worst of the blast.
Just one small bit of data to add to your NHS numbers. People forget that the UK also has private hospitals that you can go to just like in the USA, these would be available during an emergency. There is a total of 1,229 hospitals in the UK and 515 of them are private hospitals. Bed numbers are not made public but maybe in the region of 20k to 50k more and most likely to be based in large cities with most and biggest private hospitals being in London, alot of rich politicians on private health care there ;-)
And then there are the military field hospitals and the leftover plans from the covid pandemic and before which can turn schools and sports centres into hospitals as well. The retired medics along with volunteers and the military would also staff all the extra infrastructure. There are plans for mass casualty events at single or multiple locations. Also storing the dead would not be as much as a strain as it could be as icerinks and industrial fridges would be used, the plans were revised during the pandemic.
@@hitokiriizo It would cope, there may be less treatment of minor nonlife-threatening things but it would cope, never underestimate the ability of the British people to cope. It was exactly the miscalculation made during the second world war and we all know how that ended.
As an Englishman, I am honoured by your kind words at the end about England and our historical figures who stared at evil in the face and confronted it. Thank you my American cousin.
@Ryan McBeth Knowledge is nvr wasted - I really appreciated your beautiful delivery & narrative (images, maps, explanatory captions) that you've assembled together quite thoughtfully; a lot of skill here for me to get the jist. (But the only thing I couldn't expect you to now appreciate, is the Conservative gov during Covid, and no doubt this current one's, ability to strut on with "ideas" backed by zilch, or less than zero reference to those with adequate knowledge, bk ground & experience. The current UK political ministers R likely to make really poor decisions (as happened during Covid) if the Ruskies use the UK as expendable collateral to make their point 2 the rest of the West. I do wish Scientists WERE running the UK politically - it's needed). Keep it coming Ryan; enjoyed it a lot.
Having served on Vanguard class Submarines, I can attest that the continuous at sea deterrent would certainly be unleashed on Russia in such a situation. What’s left of Russia would then have to deal with a response from NATO.
But doesn't each sub carry no more than 40 warheads, and if Faslane is destroyed in a pre-emptive strike that leaves only 1 boat able to respond. We should be arming all subs with the maximum complement of missiles & warheads and aim to have 2 boats on patrol at all times.
@@brendanpells912 The number of missiles on board and the number of boats at sea depends on the current global situation, the last time we only had one boat at sea would have been 9 years ago before Russia invaded Ukraine for the first time.
@@glennbutler2070 Depends if the US backs us up. Imagine Trump was President again. The destruction is limited to the UK, he might say let's stop at that, he's done a deal with Putin where the US doesn't respond in return for Russia not attacking the US mainland. The UK alone should be able to unilaterally respond with the ability to inflict catastrophic damage to Russia, and I can believe that Putin would gamble that 40 warheads on a country the size of Russia would cause an acceptably low level of damage.
Fun fact, right next to the Oil refinery at Stanlow is a company called Lubrizol, they are one of only two places in the world that decommission chemical weapons. So that combined with a nuclear explosion at an oil refinery would cause some skin peelingly spectacular effects.
I live in Wirral, and drive past Stanlow weekly. I should not have watched this when heading to bed. Although I will be sure to update on the skin peeling.
As a kid during the Cuban missile crisis my dad told me not to worry about a nuclear war because the Russians weren't insane. However a limited nuclear war is winnable if you can contain it to a limited nuclear strike and there is the catch 22. A tactical nuke can be used very close to friendly troops and assets.
"As a kid during the Cuban missile crisis my dad told me not to worry about a nuclear war because the Russians weren't insane." Perhaps they weren't then. But they certainly seem to be now.
The Cuban missile crisis was, like this war, started by the Americans. They placed missiles in Italy & Turkey close enough to take out Moscow before a response. Russia responded with the missiles in Cuba. It was resolved when BOTH sides removed their missiles. Admitting Ukraine to NATO is the same all over again and the Russians are not having it.
The data centers, while destroyed, the data may not be lost. When the towers in New York City on 9/11 were hit, some data centers were destroyed, but there were redundant data centers clear across the country that had the backups for these data centers. One major stock market trading company lost only one transaction due to the attack. Yes, loss of personnel would still be a lot. Thanks for the breackdown.
@@Strawberrybell0 Even so there are many other smaller dater centres across the UK and Ireland which would take the strain. The UK has silly levels of redundancy and even now the government could still work reliant on military and industry infrastructure which can be separated form the wider civilian inferstucture.
The problem is the most critical infrastructure normally has legal requirements to be stored within the country and AWS is the biggest provider by far. Even data that can be stored outside the country will most likely only be on the nearest datacenter for latency and off-country backups to survive nuclear strikes will never, ever be in budget. You'd be surprised how bad the state of backups are in almost every company. I wouldn't be surprised if taking out UK AWS will disrupt most of the internet on the island as well, since the telecoms probably rely on it too in some form.
@@Strawberrybell0 When I worked in a data center we always told customers to have three copies of their data. One in house, one geographically remote, and one offline in a separate remote location. Sadly only about half of our customers actually had a separate backups, and maybe one in four actually had all three. Typically the larger the company the more serious they took their backups.
@@PhoebeK There's at least 1 such data centre not far from me and plenty of others. I suspect the real problem initially would be getting the data from there to anyone that could use it!
I remember quite vividly the Cuban Missile Crisis. America didn’t want Russian Missiles in Cuba near the coast of the US so I am probably going to be controversial but I can sympathise with the position NATO has put Putin in. Surely what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
NATO hasn't moved any nukes into any of its new member countries. Not even the Kremlin makes that claim (though Russian media have successfully stoked up that fear in their population). And on becoming independent, Ukraine gave all its nukes to Russia in return for a guarantee to respect its boundaries.
In the 1980s i knew someone who was a member of the Royal Observation Corps. He operated from a bunker near Skipsea on the east coast. He had a file with statics and projections of what was expected if a nuclear bomb fell on Kingston Upon Hull. This is near Immingham, on the Humber estuary. He also had a file about the identification of Soviet Aircraft. These files were not supposed to be seen by the public but he took them to work to study during his breaks.
What a load of bollox - if this guys had any real insight into the likeliest target for Russia v UK this would be a list of secondary targets at best. I am not going to share the first strike list for national security reasons, suffice it to say they are known and back up/ relocation sites are in place. The commentator is simply a communist sympathiser and fifth columnist spreading fear amongst the UK population. If his propaganda had any traction he would have been arrested, charged and imprisoned by now.
As a former resident of Immingham I'll point out that the Conoco oil refinery is well within blast radius of the docks if the nuke is an airburst of any considerable size and would therefore cause massive damage there. Local workers at the refinery always said that if that place went up it would blast a corner of the UK off the map. Thankfully I've moved back down south now but I clearly remember the view of the flames from Conoco from my bedroom window in the distance. Humberside airport is also not far from there so there are lots of reasons Immingham would be on the nuke map.
As a UK citizen and former member of HM Armed Forces, I can wholeheartedly say that you are 100% correct in your analysis of our response. I was merely a low-level grunt but I assure you that our appetite would be one that can be compared to Connery's speech in 'Untouchables'. The one about hospitals and morgues.....
I love your content, couldn't finish this one though. Got a panic attack. Me and my family live about 10km from Stanlow. There are 2 things providing me with comfort. There a lot of secret R&D projects within NATO and there is at least 1 nuclear strike sub hidden at sea at all times.
dont fool yourself - - sometimes own nations do it to there own people - why - to get the country to war ! why do that - every war is about population control - kill the young - they dont have a family - might sound evil to you but thats the world we live in
I know how you feel, RAF Brize Norton is similarly close to me and I'm genuinely surprised to not see it mentioned. I believe that, much like Russia's armour in Ukraine, ICBMs won't deliver their expected performance. We could shoot down ICBMs with limited success forty years ago; I have no idea what the modern approach is but I imagine it's pretty good (for an unthinkable situation, at least). My main concern would actually be whether our political elite respond in any useful way. At the moment I wouldn't trust our government with a Starbucks order, let alone a coordinated military strategy. That's what makes us vulnerable.
@@opossums-will-sing The United Kingdom does not maintain any form of national ballistic missile defence. It relies purely on its deterrent capability.
As a former soldier, the best place to be is close to the epicentre - you *do not* want to survive a nuclear attack. The instructions for doing so are for military personnel to continue ground combat - just look at Pripyat.
And this is the exact reason the UK should never give up its independent, sea based, nuclear weapons. Even if the submarines lose contact with the command structure in the UK they will have instructions on what actions to take, including predefined targets. When some people in this country call for it to be scrapped because "it's never going to be used", they are wrong; it is in use as a deterrent every single day, 24/7/365.
I live in Portsmouth about 2 miles from the naval base. I have always said that if the warning came I would put the kettle on and have a last cup of tea and maybe a packet of biscuits.
I live right next to RAF Fylingdales, and have been in the command centre (operation room) many times (my girlfriend's father worked there until retiring). I've been fortunate enough to witness simulated missile attack procedures/test drills in response to an incoming missile from Russia and the Southern Atlantic Ocean. I've even walked the long, piped walls within which runs endlessly like a maze. It's an incredibly well-built structure for its time, and a lot of their critical infrastructure is actually underground, despite the high facades you see in pictures. Up until recently, there were multiple radar domes (looked like golf balls) scattered around Fylingdales that acted as a "signal booster" (in laymen terms), but the site itself is now so powerful, that these domes are now out of commission/deconstructed. Fylingdales does have various contingencies in place to resume radar operation should any of the main active panels or radars be destroyed or attacked. It's an incredibly efficient operation, and despite the 60's-like use of corded telephones (to contact public services, the Government and of course, the RAF), AND the fact residents around here (which is few) aren't allowed to use energy smart meters as there are fears the rollout of the technology would interfere with the radar itself (crazy, I know), it's still a powerful tool in the UK's defence backyard. It's also a beautiful sight;--both inside and out--along the long, straight interior walls of the radar facades (they're all angled corridors slightly), and to witness just how well-protected the country is via a powerful over-the-horizon EWRS radar reassures me that I might not be in any blast zones any time soon!
Being in a blast zone might stop the rubber-dinghy boat pirate invasion, and crash property prices, and decimate the population. So, there'd be no traffic jams, and plenty of space to build new stuff etc. Even the nuclear cloud has a silver lining.
@@margaretblack8538 - Your Gov refused to stop a rubber dinghy boat pirate invasion, during an unprecedented global plandemic and national lockdown. The reason we have these Governments, is because women get to vote. So, this is basically all your fault. If Russia ruled Britain everything would be much better.
Corded phones are more likely to survive nuclear war than are mobile networks, and no radar on earth can stop a missile - so that blast zone is still a very real possibility. But at least you'll be able to use one of those old technology phones to tell someone about it!
I was a teenager in 1962 during the Cuban missile crisis and can remember very clearly the tension and anxiety everyone felt when president Kennedy issued his ultimatum to Russian concerning the missiles which were on their way to Cuba. We knew that we could be just hours away from a nuclear attack , and that is why I am quite worried at the moment that someone will do something stupid and bring others into the present middle east conflict.
My concern is France, Poland and some other countries really advancing into the western Ukraine, get smashed and double down with their air forces including the airfoce of the USA and finally Russia sending nuclear missiles into western Europe as a repsonse. The response to that nuclear weapons into Russia. Then what?
I was in Jr high school, in nyc. The girls were just crying. We figured it was all over. You really can't understand the fear we had. It may have started the hippie movement. Might as well party, while waiting for end.
I remember the Cuban missle Chris as well just about the whole civilised world whatever that means held it breath for about two weeks until Russia and the U.S got it sorted out diplomatically It was very close could kicked at any minute...
Some of us Brits are aware of 'other' locations for our subs to get serviced, so it would be a setback but not a loss. The data centres widely known to the public are that way, to distract from the hidden ones. Being an Island we have lots of ports, so redirection is the main requirement to keep supplies moving. If used, the nuclear weapons carried by just one Trident submarine could directly cause more than 10 million civilian casualties on Russia and there are 6 of them.
He listed Amazon's AWS datacentres... As if that is what the UK's digital infrastructure is reliant on not sure how he came to this conclusion it's as if he just looked for the biggest data centres and listed them. You're right about the ports as well we have a LOT of them supplies can be redirected quite easily.
Russia has a lot more nuclear weapons than Britain has, also they still have a massive bunker system for their population, unfortunately for us, we have none and unlike us , they still maintain a very large Civil defence . The Russians, even going back to soviet times never adopted the concept of Mutual assured destruction.
Ryan, all accurate analysis and target prediction - however, you should up the 'warheads expended' count to attain your results. Planning stats in the 1980s was Soviet systems were expected to be ~75% reliable. In hindsight this may have been optimistic. Current Russian missile reliability is running ~65% plus or minus 5% depending on who you ask. So to hit 10 targets they wouldn't use 12 warheads in two SS-N-32s (the Borei carry 16 of the Bulava R-30, NATO code nomenclature SS-N-32); to attain a to-hit ratio of 98%, they'd probably target 3x warheads per target; so 30 warheads or 5 missiles. As poorly as the SS-N-32 was during trials, that could be upped to 4 per target, or 7 missiles. Yes, just a numbers game but the poor reliability of their systems in general equates to less options for targeting confidence overall. 10 targets in the UK alone is likely grossly under their plans; extrapolate that to all nato nations to include the USA, Australia, Japan - any place that has US bases or is staunchly pro US - and it adds up quick - and they thus use up warheads quick.
Not sure I agree with your perspective on the analysis (although it's an interesting scenario), but I do wholeheartedly agree with you regarding the highly questionable reliability of the Russian strategic missile force. It is likely much worse than the second war. The incredibly high rate of launch failures during the testing of the SS-N-30 is a great example. The first set of tests couldn't even make it off the launch platform, let alone into the atmosphere.
Agreed though US weapons also have reliability issues with tritium. parts and possibly classified material . We could end up very lucky where everything gets used but so much of it doesn't work the societies survive,
@@simonacerton3478 The difference is that Russia has a lot more targets to hit, where as NATO have more missiles and less ground to cover. A nuclear scenario wouldn't look good for anyone, but it looks especially bleak for Russia.
@@zyeborm no, but communications don't entirely rely on fibre optics. Especially when you are talking government/military/infrastructure communications. All luxury transmissions can cease, leaving whatever capacity is left for essential comms. Plenty of copper line, satellites, small radio transmitters and of course physical data transfer methods exist if FO is disrupted. Plus, I'm betting that the loss of those centres won't disrupt the networks as much as you think. Plenty of hidden data centres, connections and "hubs" around the UK. It's a fascinating topic. Even the target list in this video doesn't list a more important site for UK data and Fibre Optics. Russia will certainly have to pick their targets well if they intend on a hard enough hit to cripple the nation without leading to a nuclear response from more than just Britain. That real list of targets will make the difference between crippling and pissing off Britain!
Thing about the U.K. is… Like the US, we’ve got RAF and Naval bases in other countries. Also, it’s difficult for Russian subs to leave a dock without being tailed.
We recently tested one of our nuclear missiles, it flipped over 3 times and splashed in the ocean next to the submarine (Rule Britannia.) Our new counter strike plan is to send them in the post.
Data centers are all backed up at remote locations in many cases hardened locations. As an IT professional I would expect you to know this. This is primarily to protect against natural disasters, but is very effective for military attacks as well.
As somebody who works in datacentre automation and spends a lot of time in them: nonsense. Nobody, but nobody, backs up datacentres. You back up critical data you use in them. That is not at all the same thing. In a DC of 10k servers you could depending on the US only see a couple of TB of data you need to keep - others it can be much more.
Think of the tens, or hundreds of thousands of connections which link into that data centre, will all be destroyed. With those connections lost it's irrelvant if the "data centres are backed up" as those customers (most of london) will not have resiliant data links to other data centres. Also Data centres may have dual redunancy but they wont be entireley 'backed up'.
Having once worked in the IT department of a major bank, I know that all data of the nature you described gets backed up at least on a daily basis or where deemed critical, on the fly. Either by dedicated high speed fibre optics or to tapes. In both cases the back ups end up miles away from their original locations, with a carefully planned (and rehearsed) procedure and infrastructure to get things up and running again very quickly. Regarding such an extensive nuclear attack on the UK, I'm more inclined to believe that the powers that be's response to NATO's 'Take it on the chin' approach will be more along the lines of 'Not a chance, but care to join us old boy?' and if any of American proposed targets are hit, then there will certainly be instantaneous retaliation of a greater magnitude from across the pond.
I;m not sure why he called Sovereign house AWS, they have stuff there probably, but it’s not their DC. They would probably hit the AWS and Azure infrastructure, but there are a cluster of datacenters around Sov which and also a few out to the east owned by Telecity which would mean the uk internet capability would be gone instantly. I’m not sure why you would nuke them though when convential weapons delivered hypersonically would be just as effective. I don’t think the scenario of using a Nuclear weapon really exists tactically, it is purely a message, and ultimately a roll of the dice for compliance or end game.
I've also once worked in a couple of banks in IT. But look at it, your prized Disaster Recovery Tapes are miles away and you've got to A] send an email to someone - which won't work cause the infrastructure is down B] phone someone - disruption to mobile phone and comms networks, C] send a carrier pigeon - disorientated due to ionizing radiation, to get a message that you need your tapes. Assuming they, Iron Mountain or who ever are still alive, what are they going to do ? EMP taken out all the electronics in modern trucks, assuming they'll spend the diesel to get the tapes to you as they may have enough Diesel to get to you but not back to base, and the workforce, if they've turned up for work, your going to be their priority ? Assuming if the tapes do arrive, your focus is not on your survival or that of your family, what will you do ? Go on Amazon and order a couple of dozen servers for next day delivery ? Where is your kit going to come from ? And where is the power and connectivity going to go ? What do you plan to do ? Hook it all into the world stock markets which require those bombed out data centres or as many ATM machines in the towns near you ? Do you really think in such a situation people will walk to an ATM to get money to buy the goods they need when the risk of radiation is high, to pay for things at the shop that has no online banking facilities or perhaps even electricty ? OR will they just walk in, take what they can carry and walk out ? A question I've never asked - will the 'smart debit card in your pocket work after an EMP strike ?" And who is going to care ? I think there is Disaster Recovery plans and then there are Disaster Recovery Plans. This isn't the kind of disaster that disaster recovery is intended to cope with.
@@alexwild4350 These plans were originally implemented when the I.R.A was causing significant but localised damage around the cities of England. The point I was making was not that everything would be up and running ok within 24 hours but contradicting the authors point of view that as you seem to think, that the described targets will evoke total Armageddon. Regarding EMP, it will need much much more than half a dozen nuclear explosions to completely knock out the whole of England's electrical and electronic infrastructure. Was Tokyo and the rest of Japan affected this way by the bombs that fell on Nagasaki and Hiroshima. No the damage was localised. I totally agree with you that everyone will be up the proverbial creek without a paddle in this digital age if there was a total EMP strike across England but it is my belief that a strike of this magnitude could only be implemented by extraterrestrial sources. But that is not why I posted my comment
@@TinSandwichUK you miss the whole point of video it's not suppose to cause armageddon but create as much panic and as much chaos as possible and not being able to get your data for 2 days will cause a lot of companies to not be able to work properly for weeks
*Note* Faslane (HNMB Clyde) also houses US Subs from time to time. (Lucky to be able to see subs go up and down the Clyde from time to time from where I live.)
These long form videos are amazing! I know they take up much more time than short form content, and I bet they rake in less traffic, but they are the key to build a long and lasting community on UA-cam!
When I was a child, during the Cold War around 1984 I lived in rural Northamptonshire. Small villages and towns, nothing of importance for bombs to be aimed at. Safe away from the big cities. Or so it seamed. Molesworth, which was Greenham Common's twin brother storing nuclear weapons was 5 miles away and there was an early warning station 2 miles away. It turned out my area was probably one of the first locations to be bombed. Both sites were decommissioned after the Cold War which was a blessed relief. Sadly, we are back to 1984.
I feel this is different, Russia has been tested and shown to be "less than expected" My generation does not live in fear of a nuclear bomb. I, personally, can't do a thing if a nuclear attack is to happen, other than be prepared... As much as possible.
You missed out the importance of Southampton. Fawley refinery is located on Southampton water and just 3 miles away is the city of Southampton and the second largest container port after Felixstowe. Also there is Marchwood military port between the refinery and the docks. That area would produce some very rich pickings for any enemy.
And yes, I would think by now that Vlad knows that he really only has the backing of Kim Jong Il. Otherwise, China isn't ready to "go there" to that dance with Vlad, so, really, he's alone if he decides to nuke the UK. And I would agree Sgt, that Britain is indeed ready and Russia's fate is sealed if they tried such a gambit.
Very interesting and I believe your absolutely correct about us in the U.K. we aren’t scared of evil it’s something we’ve stood against time and time again and I’ve no doubt we’ll do it again if forced to
@@bruderschweigen6889 might be a very different type of people, but one thing that’s a certain guarantee, the People of the UK will come together just as our forefathers did, no matter where people of UK originate from! Why do you think mainland UK has never been invaded since 1066?🇬🇧✊🏽
In the 1980's one of the first targets would have been Bracknell South of London as it was the home of the MET office. It was a major target as without knowledge of the weather it would make military planning far more difficult.
The Tridents are getting old, corrosion is taking its toll, gaskets and O-rings are falling apart and the electronics are ancient. A modern activity bracelet has more calculating power than the guidance system, so Trident is more than outdated as a deterrent.
I think you are forgetting Plymouth. It's always been a military city, it's got nuclear submarines and several RAF Bases, and a relatively small population for a British city.
An our biggest naval base. But no ships! The the most capable ships in the fleet (the carriers and the Type 45s - when they are not being fixed, of course) are based at Portsmouth. But the our most capable vessels of all are not the ships, but the boats all operating out of Faslane. And, of course, the nuclear warheads are stored under the hill the other side of the Loch.
@@adriangoodrich4306 Devonport is the home to the Amphibious fleet, half of the U.K.'s Frigate fleet, Several Nuclear Subs and numerous RFA's and of course the weapons depot at Ernesettle...I'd say it's getting a nuke of it's own.
This was all sounding a bit grim until you mentioned Slough would be destroyed but now I’m sold on the plan
😂😂🤣🤣
Is a bit of a dump.
😂😂😂
HUZZAAAR!
Brilliant!
Greetings from a small medieval university town in the UK, located 23 miles from Lakenheath, 52 miles from Felixstowe, 48 miles from Sovereign House, and about 57 miles from the Equinix Data Centre in Slough. If any of the described things happen, I'm so sorry that I won't be able to visit Moscow and St Petersburg, as those cities would cease to exist.
And 11 miles from Royston. I would say that you work at Cambridge Analytica, but the HQ would be 47 miles from you.
225 warheads currently, and enough time and detection to launch well before any 1st strike weapons land. Unlikely they can take out all the subs before most launch
@@benyreesy Indeed!
@@GeorgeVenturi 11 miles correct, Cambridge correct, Analytica: nope. :)
@@andrasferencz7948 But if you did, could you talk about it publicly. Kinda like if you worked in N. Yorkshire Menwith Hill. If the missiles come for England, your cousins across the pond got your back.
If you blind a country's early warning radar, that seriously risks an "Empty the silos" command.
True I thought about that too. If they take out their warning system what stops them from assuming more nukes are coming right?? Realistically that would make them assume the worst
It's not just the UK's Early Warning Radar...
It's the US' as well...
If Fylingdales went down the US might also have to respond.
The UK's nuclear defense isn't in the form of ground silos but a many nuclear trident submarines at sea, if you attack, you will get killed, as is the case with all form of nuclear offensives
@@dogsnads5634 Not might, would, definitely. Mind there is an upside. There'd be no problem parking anywhere in Russia. It'd just be one huge car park.
@@beepboop9848 That was the modus operandi of the cold war. If one of the early warning radars would be targeted the rest of the world would have burned.
You can only assume the worst when you are blinded and its your survival on the line.
I work in immingham port, where i am sitting right now i am within 2 miles of: 2 huge oil refineries, 2 gas terminals, millions of tons of explosive fertiliser, 3 power stations, 2 chemical manufacturing plants, inorganic gas plant, multi million cubic meters of stored liquid gas, petroleum, kerosene, millions of tons of wood pellets and coal, not to mention the local RAF base, i honestly think they'd target my actual office.
Was nice knowing you buddy
Ironically from that it looks like you might be one of the fortunate ones. ie. you would know nothing about it.
😢
Da👍🏼😉
Not to mention RAF Waddington in Lincoln we have always had this. But in WW2 Russian comrades saved my Scottish Veteran Dad. He'd be livid that USA have gone mental gone mental again.
The UK would retaliate but seek maximum casualties, because its posture is calibrated for countervalue.
I'm in London and I want chocolate rain, not radioactive rain :(
@@CryptoRoast_0 London is so big and the streets so spaghetti-like, the nuke might get lost and hit Scotland before it can ask for directions.
@@tayzonday imma haunt the shit out of you if you're wrong. 😅
@@tayzonday I guess you could say they'd be in chocolate pain
One of the Targets Would be Kalinigrad.
Ryan trying not to freak out his neighbors to much by speaking quietly.
Correct. Miss Margaret was asleep.
@@RyanMcBethProgramming Ryan at the end of the video you forgot Thomas Cochrane, that mofo was a savage and very underrated haha. But great but not (wanted in a way) video, would be cool if you could make a target list on other countries.. hope it comes to it tho
Lol. I noticed this too
he managed to freak me out with that video ;-/
@@RyanMcBethProgramming Play fair Ryan!...If you are going to do a "Where dem nukes go UK" vid, then you have to give one to Sheffield because of the classic feel good movie of the century "Threads"...And if its those Rooskies doing it then it has to get TWO, Respect the classics!
You could completely vaporise the entire U.K., but I can guarantee you that there would be at least one bloke who was in the pub toilet having a piss at the time and missed the whole thing, who would come out, pour himself a free pint and the crack on with tidying this whole mess up.
It would be a Geordie and he would probably have 4 or 5 pints of Newcastle brown before coming to the conclusion that it was down to him to invade Russia. ( God help the Russians when he gets there. A Geordie kiss is nothing to be laughed at )
Silly billy grow up
Facts👍
Simon pegg🤣😆
If there were two blokes in different pubs a mile apart, they'd bumb into each other and say "alright mate, what's going on" and the reply would be "not much mate, same old shit, eh?"
Fylingdales, not "Flyingdales". But you paint a disturbing picture. I'm getting an extra packet of tea in, just in case.
..and oat cakes..
Steady on, old chap!
The world may end, but that won’t stop a Brit from having tea lol
Grew up about a 15 minute drive from Stanlow, was told my whole life that it was a nuclear target. Good to know it's still got what it takes to make the list.
Indeed. I'm in the middle of a bunch if USAF/RAF bases. I'm f***ed.😂
😂😂😂 Me too 🤣🤣🤣
I live a mile from stanlow
He forgot Manchester Airport its been on the Hit List since the 60s and I live 10miles from it😮😂😂😂
They started decommissioning Shell Stanlow in 1985, my dad got retired off early so I am told now by the Shell pensioners guy who goes to see my old mother the place is all but just land in some places they are still burning gas off.
Couple years ago I have red how people in the sixties were convinced that the nuclear war was imminent and I thought "Luckily this was a thing from the past. Nothing like that can happen now"
And now we are here
And like them, its all but garunteed to happen. The only reason nuclear war didn't happen was because of one or two men in the right place at the right time.
Such men no longer exist in this era.
Stock up on clean water and food, and have an escape plan.
As a millennial raised by baby boomers, I would always tell people that we could be right back into those Cold War drills and stockpiling iodine tablets, but nobody listened until now
@@FarmerDrew I bought some iodine recently and also bought it for my relatives. So surreal
@@Igor_lvanov I've been prepping for the better part of a decade, 2014 was a crazy year for geopolitics. My wife and I farm and live in Dayton, with a full root cellar "bomb shelter" style basement in a 1919 house. Dayton would be a probable target for American incoming. Never far from my mind. Part of the reason why I am so active on UA-cam shooting down misinformation and rallying the public support for Ukraine. We are on this channel because we value the lifestyle of the warrior. Prepping for life after nukes is one thing, but prepping for honorable death is the essence. Part of the reason I took refuge in Tibetan Buddhism. Death is a realm of total enlightenment's possible understandings, and if one accepts the ever present nature and embraces it knowingly, in dying we may truly be alive.
@@FarmerDrew Actually I have lived my whole life in Moscow, Russia, but I am a Jew, so after the beginning of the war in Ukraine I moved to Israel. One of the reasons for that decision was the fact that I no longer felt safe in Moscow because it would be the primary target in case of the nuclear war
Just remember the UK has at least 1 (but probably 2 at this point in time) nuclear submarines of its 4 armed and ready at all times. That's 8-16 missiles with up to 80 nukes ready to launch. If Russia nuked London it wouldn't just stop there, Moscow would be destroyed/St Petersberg levelled along with other parts of Russia. If they nuke the UK I don't think the old empire would just sit back and say "you win". Unfortunately it would probably mean the whole world ends. Great video by the way 👍
It's also worth mentioning that they're armed, ready, and often no-where near the UK.
You can't take them out by nuking the ports etc, they're already out there. You'll never know where. So they will come back. And if the orders are to launch, they will get you.
They don't even need direct orders there's a letter in a safe on every British SSBN of what to do in the event the UK gets nuked.
There are only 4 real options, do nothing and join up with allide forces , full nuclear response to hi value targets, limited response and join allies or act at your own discretion.
Kaliningrad is a likely first target.
@@mikewade777 Its a directly nearby of many EU/NATO countries.
@@mikewade777 God no.
It's next to friendly nations, no way would they hit there first.
May as well take out power structure etc as there's not enough nukes to go round, so they'd hit St Petersburg to take out that and the docks, and Moscow.
Greetings from Greenock Scotland (river Clyde across from Faslane) while we are still here
And Hunterston nearby down the coast. You guys are vaporised.
Prophecy on massive tidal wave by Saint Malachy has to be connected
You would have thought Coulport and Glen Douglas would have been targets
The only rational response to a limited strike is to neutralize the threat in full. If a guy shoots you in the arm, you don't just hope that's the end of it, and you don't shoot him in the arm so he understands that you are capable of defending yourself. You have to assume that he intended to kill you and missed, and you make sure that he never gets the opportunity to take a second shot.
Unless by shooting them back you assure that he'll get in headsshot after.
replay that scenario but your in a room of gas tanks with other innocent people, that's the difficulty of the decision to make
@@cortster12 dont argue with me
Is right mate we have our trident subs and would smoke Russia
Slava Ukraini
alts?
If I'm right, the U.K. always has at least 1 Ballistic Missile sub somewhere in the ocean at all times. Each one has 40 warheads, capable of levelling large areas of Russia. If the U.K. is ever targeted with a nuclear strike, you can bet that sub will be launching soon after.
Also, the captain has orders agreed in advance so if our command and control is taken out the subs executive team can act on their own.
I wonder how much counter attack would be done, obviously UK would fire back, but how much would US fire back? We'd have the capacity to wipe Russia off the map, but how much damage would we cause?
@@hejalll I always assumed that the response to the use of any type of nuclear warhead on a friendly nation was a unilateral full arsenal counter strike. I could be wrong in term of real world application but i always thought that was the theory. Even if the allies of the UK don't openly launch, I can't imagine the UK would withstand a nuclear strike and not not launch in full force back even if it's alone
It’s not 40 per sub anymore, it went way up when Boris became PM and went higher when Russia started threatening the UK. But the government won’t say how many
@@hejalll well article 5… so you can guess russias military infrastructure will get leveled
Make no mistake, London would respond in kind. There is a Royal Navy submarine, at sea at all times, with nuclear weapons ready to launch.
I also feel like the U.S. and France would throw their about 1600 nukes at Russia too.
@@kurtsell8376 The only logical decision if you're going to fire one missile is fire them all and hope you cripple your enemy. "If I send 10 and there's a 1% c\hance they respond with full force I had better send everything first."
And the United States would help ensure that every major Russian city, becomes glass.
That's just for the launch. It's unlikely that those missiles make landfall, possibly if Russia uses It's entire (on paper 🤷♂️) air-launched capacity, that a few missiles make it through, but even that's a gamble on their part.
This is also assuming we know nothing ahead of time and only UK forces move to intercept.
It's possibly the stupidest move at Putin's disposal, so I do kinda see why Ryan would want him to try it 😂
@@kurtsell8376 need I say "article 5"
RAF Flyingdales ? Oh, he's good. Be even better if we had an RAF Flyingdales.
As a UK citizen it was very touching when he said "The rest of the world will cross oceans to help". I tip my bowler hat to you all.
we americans might be a little brash but we love everyone at the end of the day! we got u broski 😭
@@isaiahwilliams5988 Thank you brother Isaiah for your reassuring words. I didn't expect to be so moved when I clicked on this video out of curiosity.
I doubt Russia would get away with attacking the UK without a full scale US response. I don't think we'd go for negotiations after that
Russia isn't that stupid. They know if they even look at the UK wrong that the US will show up with everything we've got. It wouldn't even get to that point. We would act preemptively. While Russia was even thinking about it the US would F#*@ them up. Simple as that.
I have no doubt that my fellow Americans would absolutely lose their minds with retaliatory rage if the UK was attacked. The United Kingdom has one of the strongest relationships with the US imaginable.
My dad always told me that as a kid, his greatest fear was nuclear war. The idea that everyone, everything you love could be erased just like that.
I sit here in disbelief that 40 years later, the same existential threat has returned to the minds of our generation. Shocking...
EDIT: I never said the threat was ever not there over those 40 years, I meant the paranoia of nuclear war has returned to public consiousness on a level far greater than the 90s, 00s and 10s.
News for you, mate - that 'existential threat' NEVER WENT AWAY! You just forgot about it.
@@jackx4311 Someone on another page here says this ''Make no mistake, the US leadership elite is trying to get the UK nuked. It wants the European economy collapsed, and it wants to use the UK as it’s sacrificial lamb to destroy Russia and vice versa. Why? It’s all very simple. Europe wants to create a Euro army independent of NATO. If that happens Europe can rival the US in military might, and there’s the added fear it will form a pact with Russia. That means US hegemony over Europe and the Eastern Atlantic will be compromised. What you people don’t understand, the USA deliberately (and secretly) started WW1 & WW2 because it wanted its tentacles on the shipping lanes of the Atlantic and Pacific. These trade lanes form the bedrock of the US economy, and what makes it a superpower. Anyway, It first did this by secretly beefing up the German economy and industry to build the Wehrmacht, as it knew the UK would go to war with any rival. It’s worth noting: America was considering launching an assault on the Brit Empire under War Plan Red, but realising it would be too risky, they got the Germans to - unwittingly - fire the bullet instead. Long story short, as Europe was on its knees in war debt, the US sent occupational troops on a cleaning up exercise, and ever since the US has controlled Europe. And same with the imperial power that was Japan - the US kept goading them with economic embargo’s, so they were left with no other option but to attack - precisely what the US wanted, so it could then retaliate, defeat Japan, occupy the country (and later the majority of South East Asia), and dominate the Pacific shipping lanes. If anyone thinks that happened by accident, then I have some sea front property in Birmingham you might like to buy. Regardless, the US leadership elite are total and utter psychopaths; they were never our allies, and only have their troops / bases in our countries to keep our military / political activities under surveillance, and to keep us enemies of Russia. So, yes, the plan is for the UK and Russia to destroy eachother, while the US sits back and revels in its twisted accomplishments.''
What do you think??
@Nicholas Conundrum eh, what cliche'd waffle is that?
@@createagoogleaccount7574 NATO has never ever once protected a country but it likes invading them? How is it that people don't understand that?
Did your dad pinch that phrase from Tommy Cooper?
The U.K. counter attack is not affected by any brief decision making pause based on launching only two missiles.
The U.K.'s entire nuclear deterrent is submarine based, it cannot be prevented from responding. There is always at least one Trident submarine at sea.
I think they are possibly all at sea right now ! 4 submarines full of trident missiles should make a good sized dent in putlerland.
@@woolyimage I imagine at least one in the Baltic Sea or nearby
U.K sub captains tuning in to the Archers
@@mkb2010mb when it doesn’t play at 7 they’ll know something’s wrong
Trident is a partnership with the usa so there are more than just the 4 subs with the system
Well , looks like we're about to find out just how accurate this list is
Live in Portsmouth, work next to Fawley…tbh having done NBC training when I was a soldier in the 90’s, I wouldn’t want to survive. But I don’t think any country would stop the UK from responding in kind.
I've worked at Fawley and a lot of it is so old it doesn't need a missile for it to potentially explode! 😆
they'd make all the right noises - of only to protect themselves.
The plan isnt M.A.D its Hiroshima, Nagasaki 2 and instead of US occupation,
it would be Sir Klaus Schwab's owned UN
If the Russians nuke us, we won't be able to respond. Anyway, they wouldn't nuke us directly, they would hit the sea around the isles to create a huge tidal wave. There wouldn't be much left.
Why do people always bring in these silly Jewish conspiracies?
The craziest thing about this is thinking that a nuclear war would be limited.
I agree,, also as soon as the first nuke goes off it will be the end of the planet.
I agree. A limited attack makes the enemy vulnerable to overwhelming retaliation. To stand a chance of avoiding that, the pre-emptive strike would need to be overwhelming. That said, the escalatory ladder has many rungs. If Russia used tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine, any NATO response would likely be severe but conventional, at least at first. I imagine they would try to take out Russia's strategic nuclear capability, although locating all their nuclear subs would be difficult, so they'd have to focus on land based silo's and rely on satellite data to track mobile cruise missiles. In any case, the moment a WMD is used in Ukraine the landscape changes changes beyond recognition.
Well he wants to puppet us all separately England, Scotland, Wales and use us
So
It’s a cheesy and overused statement but it’s true that the world is becoming more and more divided and unprepared for war, especially the west. It is potentially feasible that a limited nuclear strike could happen without the immediate reaction of a return strike
Only mentals and yanks think that. I imagine there will be some along in a moment to tell you how it could be so. Once the first one gets used in anger, all bets are off.
I wrote a letter to Stanislav Petrovs kid once... no idea if it ever made it to her, but I just wanted to say thank you from an American who was 4 years old the day that her father spared my life.
That man should have an international holiday celebrated in his name.
Stanislav Petrov Day is the 26th of September each year. For obvious reasons, it was observed more widely in 2022 than earlier years. I don't think it's a national holiday anywhere, but you can take the day off work if you like. I understand the traditional way to commemorate Petrov's restraint is to find a large red button and refrain from pressing it.
A real hero
I seriously don't get it why he didn't get a Nobel peace prize..
e
He had the presence of mind to think seriously whether or not this was likely taking place, and common sense intervened to save the day.
Life in Grimsby is bad enough. Living with the cerebrally challenged, fishy smells, etc etc but Immingham (where George Smiley was going at the end of Tinker Tailor) being within 10 miles just puts the icing.....
Didn’t Anne’s car break down there?
I knew that name was familiar of course it was from LeCarre
The UK has an independent nuclear deterrent. In other words a limited nuclear attack as you describe against the UK would result in an automatic retaliation against the aggressor. It doesn't matter what the rest of the world decided to do, the UK would have nothing to loose by using all of it's limited nuclear strike force .
Yes, it might be a mistake to attack UK in a "limited" way, as UK is so small that the retaliation would have to include both Moscow and St. Petersburg. That would be the only proportional response. So not a clever move by Putin.
@@patrikfloding7985 Absolutely, whatever capability we had is already paid for so why not unleash it all at once. About 225 submarine tridents would give good coverage. Might as well do Russia's allies at the same time to help our allies out
@@patrikfloding7985 even if the UK decides not to retaliate, that doesn’t mean this is over. The US and UK would judge Putin to be an existential threat on par with Hitler and gear for total war, set up blockades, etc. The mistake we keep making in warfare is that the other side will be too horrified by the brutality and give in. This rarely happens. This is why diplomacy is so important. It is distressing this ukraine war continues without any peace talks ongoing. Did Putin decide on this course of action alone or with consultation from the CCP? Why are there no peace talks? It costs nothing to talk.
@@Greg-yu4ij every Dictator that has been given 'peace talks' actually sees them as 'appeasement' and goes on to commit worse. Dictators are NOT democracies and can not be treated as such. By mere definition, the population under such dictator has no say in anything and, in most cases, professes no interest for fear of personal death (any hope is some hope!). There is only one way to deal with Dictators - absolute removal. The problems with that solution is that it then leaves a power vacuum in their country! And that can be somewhat interesting in itself. However, the removal of said Dictator usually results in a few years of respite for the rest of the world.
The warheads are independent, though since electing to utilise only US Trident missiles for delivery, the deterrent requires US co-operation. Just as the F-35B operation require the US not to have sent a kill code to the platform.
To quote the first Google Snippet:
"The United Kingdom does not own its own missiles, but has title to 58 Trident SLBMs from a pool of missiles shared with the United States Navy."
Imagine the improvements an ground burst on Slough would do.
That's not funny - it would cause thousands of pounds damage.😢
It might improve the sewage works?
Just one giant pothole to fill.
@@hugh.r9639 Thousands? That would only happen if someone who wasn't local parked their car there. 😂
@@hugh.r9639thousands of pounds of improvements
As a British citizen who has been on antidepressants for a long time this has really cheered me up.
Much in the same way Watching Watership Down as a 5 year old cheered me up 😂🤣
Could be worse they could be Russian nuclear rabbits 🐇,keep your chin up and shoulders back mate x
Anti Ds only make your situation worse in the long run, plus addiction.
@@MrJamiez very true.. all they do is keep you addicted so they can make money from the situation .. rather than teaching people how to overcome depression... The right foods , exercise. Setting small goals that can be achieved , and other stuff to keep the mind busy.... Depression is just a state of mind , once the causes are identified . You can actually change how your mind thinks and works ... But it does take time and practice.
Water ship down is the ultimate horror movie.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
There's one detail you've missed out, the UK's nuclear submarines.
There is _always_ one at sea & hidden so there's some overlap with 2 at sea & hidden as the shifts change over.
The thing with these boats is that they run radio-silent, they just listen on a pre-determined schedule, they're listening for coded instructions & they're listening for a specific phrase on BBC's World Service.
I have no idea what instructions are available but I expect it would be a very limited set of options, maybe as little as "change to target set B" & "fire now".
The interesting one is the BBC signal.
It's just an 'all clear' but if it becomes absent the submarine is _required_ to assume that Britain is lost & a full barrage from all tubes is launched in a retaliatory strike on targets determined before the boat sets out to sea. The target set might be several months out of date at the time of launch.
But also why would Russia want to destabilise NATO they’re on the same team you know.
@@alwynwatson6119 Russia is 100% against nato.
@@alwynwatson6119 russia is not in NATO
Not only the subs but the UK has territory all of the world do you think the UK has all its eggs in one basket. I guarantee the uk has nukes scattered all over its territories. Russia would face the full wrath of the UK if they attacked with nuclear weopons.
Russia would definitely be destroyed but due to the fact the UK has territory everywhere it would survive. So all Russia would achieve is its assured destruction.
@@alwynwatson6119 +1 the same "evil one's" control both sides, while the common man pays the price
"I am confident the United Kingdom would prevail." Well, thanks, mate. As a Brit who lives five miles from Portsmouth, that's comforting to know. 😃
I'm shocked at those here who imagine it would be like a global video game that doesnt effect them at all.
Well Putin has said that he wants to see the UK under the sea and Edward Cayce has predicted the same.
@@ChickpeatheTortie Holy crap. We're all buggered then! 😃
@CathyKitson
Not really because the uk would retaliate and that would also be the end of Russia
@@UpinsmokeXVI Yes. We probably would - or the US, being our ally. But it wouldn't only be the end of Russia, it'd be the end of all of us. So either way, we lose.
The problem with this is that it assumes that England would not react and target Russian airfields, nuclear silos, and submarines in a preemptive strikes. MI-6 would probably have a idea the attack was coming a few hours before it happens. Russian chatter is very easy to pick up on, and the Royal navy has been tracking the Russian baltic fleet for years.
And also it is would be an incredibly huuuuge political risk for Putin both from within the country and from other countries who are still neutral, like China and India
Here's what a lot of people dont understand. Corruption in russia has made it sooooo easy for MI6 and the CIA to recruit russians and get all kinds of juicy details about their communications, etc. We basically know everything they're doing in real time. That's how the US knew the invasion was going to happen, down to the minute.🤷♂️
Even better: take out all their oil fields, refineries, pipelines, all their fossil fuel infrastructure. And send wave after wave of assassins to execute Putin.
As an American, I really try to take this seriously, but all I can do is inwardly laugh because the Russians threatening nuclear anything just makes me think of Dexter from Dexter's laboratory saying the word " *Nuclear* " just to sound cool
supposedly …
the Russians blew up nordstream 1+2.
Despite all tracking …
Check out the 1984 film Threads. It was well researched. Not easy to watch, especially if you lived through the 80s and lived in the city it was set in.
It was likely just atrocity fear pr0n from the establishment, delivered to the public via their propaganda machine the BBC. I remember watching Threads as a teen in the 80s, but obviously I did not understand much about the ins and outs of it all. However I now realise we fought the wrong enemy in WW2.
Same
Living in the UK and watching your summary of a Russian attack the thought doesnt sit easy with me. But I do believe we wouldn't just sit back and take it. I was in Scotland recently and watched one our nuclear deterrent submarines heading out to sea, just by pure luck in the right place at the right time. It was sort of reassuring in a strange way, let's just hope the deterrent force is stronger and remains the prevention and not the retaliation.
Problem is we wouldn’t last 5 minutes with or without our nukes . We don’t have to enough to completely take out Russia but they do us
There is NO way Russia can use a nuclear weapon against a NATO country and expect Moscow to not be completely destroyed by a retaliatory hydrogen bomb.
I would suggest that the uk and USA would retaliate on the same scale as Russia, targeting the same infrastructure.
The UK Government take orders from the EU they all want WW3 it's part of their planned agenda,I was warned 2yrs ago to get out of the UK as it's not on the 2023 census or map,the EU also planned to flood the UK with millions of immigrants before then,the Royal Family her Ministers & Government all committed treason by signing 5+ EU treaties since 1998.
@@martinhill6838 Everything in the UK is now owned & controlled by the EU including the Military.
Watched this as the afternoon Sun glinted off the Clyde, and in the distance the top of the ship (submarine) lift at Faslane at the top of the Gareloch, so adds more than a touch of reality to the viewing experience. An excellent analysis although given some of the surrounding population centres I fear that casualty estimates would be much higher (including myself). Although equally as John Hackett argued in his seminal book “The Third World War” Fylingdales and HMNB Clyde, might be the last places they would strike for fear of escalating an all out NATO response in return. Another of this ridiculous wars tragedy’s is that we are again debating this 40 years after he raised that same question. Thanks again for a sobering but insightful video.
That was a very good book! I remember reading it as a very young man.
@@markwierzbicki5307 Have it on my desk for the latest uncountable read. Falling apart at the binding, still very relevant. That and Team yankee although T.Y needs a rewrite now..
@@jeffho1727 Hi from a retired RCT/ RLC, I see you are Ruin Everything Mechanical Eventually. LOL. I won't give too many gigs as two of my nephews served / are serving REME. Stay safe buddy!
One thing submarines are not is a ship, they're boats
@@markwierzbicki5307 Tanker?? Lol. Some of the Corps best friends. Job security and appreciated. Im well retired now, living the life of a gentleman. Hope its all good for you as well. Edit BTW, show my avatar to your nephews. I am a colonial RCEME...
Growing up during the cold war was this fun every day. Returning to college later in life and majoring in Russian allowed me to study many things in depth that I only saw one-sided as a child. Studying in Russia in 2009 allowed me to apply my studies and skills to develop my own impressions of everything. That was a different time and I am grateful to have taken that leap and to have seen and experienced what I did in that time. Where we are now has only reinforced my belief that humans rarely learn and that lack of learning costs the lives of masses on the whims of a few. Thank you Ryan for using the hammer of knowledge against the sickle of evil!
Когда они создали закрытую систему типа кгб, которая не подчиняется никому и никак не эволюционирует, а наоборот. Именно тогда они создали предпосылки для событий 2008-2030. Предпосылки для всеобщей дозволенности действий и с серьезным лицом, но красным носом в кармане
Ordinary people learn from mistakes, leaders don't learn from mistakes, because other people pay for their mistakes.
this nuke scenario discussion isn''t fun, but it's way better than UK politics is right now and arguably less damaging to the nation as a whole
@@DVAmarkera it doesn't look like Google has made a good translation of your comment.
@@alanhat5252 "When they created a closed system like the KGB, which does not obey anyone and does not evolve in any way, but vice versa. It was then that they created the prerequisites for the events of 2008-2030. Prerequisites for the general permissibility of actions and with a serious face, but a red nose in his pocket"
I don't know, I think you can get the general sense of it. Michael presents the KGB as an example of a system that does not learn, one that has set the behaviour of Russia on its inevitable downward slide into tragicomic farce.
The UK should adopt a policy of strict neutrality. It is the safest option.
It always brings out some national pride when people from other countries actually compliment your nation.
Such wisdom in your words. Who was complimenting Britain when they were building The Empire, or Rome when they were building theirs? Fun fact: No one!
@@tangoalpha1905 OK snowflake
@@Ethaarus - OK snowflake? Your brand of retardation is the reason Britain is in the position it is. Whatever will you do when other nations don't Compliment you.
@@tangoalpha1905 Probably just get on with my life, you should try it rather than starting pointless arguments on the Internet. 👍
@@Ethaarus - Started? Potato.
As a proud citizen of the UK (and firmly in the prevailing fallout zone of Lakenheath!) It's nice to see a reasonably well-informed analyst agreeing with my own thoughts on the matter. As a child of the cold-war it's something I've put a fair amount of thought into, and have come to very similar conclusions. I've also concluded that it's an unlikely scenario, as it's not a conflict that russia could win, they're simply not capable of resisting a NATO that's really pissed-off!
As far as the resilience of the British people goes, you're right, while we might seem meek and mild to many outsiders, there's a steely stubbornness that's been the demise of many foes.
And NATO would be *pissed beyond reason*. No rules after that.
Huh. Meek and mild? I've never thought that way about the brits..cheers from America 🇺🇸
We British are normally apathetic and indifferent, but if you put our backs against the wall we'll fight tooth and nail to the death.
Such a gentle British answer. I do agree.
@@edelweiss2971 Maybe it would have been simpler to use American english - "Fuck yeah, bring it!"
But it's not quite as nuanced is it.
I've decided to move to Basingstoke. It seems to me like they already nuked it 40 years ago so with luck they won't bother to do it again.
Seeing as you have two spares I would think menwith hill and GCHQ would be worthwhile targets
Yeah, I’m surprised GCHQ isn’t on the list.
129000 hospital beds, and every single one of them is full at the moment, so uh good luck everyone.
That's your hip replacement postponed again...
Jokes on you ..none of us are making it to a hospital bed
It's every man for himself if anything goes down
Every sub captain in the UK has a letter in the safe that determines their action in case of communication breakdown. A lot is speculated what is in these letters, but it makes sense that it goes in line of, confirm there was a nuclear attack, confirm the origin, empty your entire arsenal, then report back to the closest friendly naval base.
Slight correction, not all subs have a letter of last resort as not all subs are nuclear armed, just nuclear powered.
@@gregtompson3432 I wonder if Liz Truss has read the brief on that topic yet?
@@alanhat5252 She probably wrote it on her 2nd or 3rd day
@@alanhat5252 She can read?
Russia would assume this as well so logically "limited" nuclear war will not be a thing. You use everything you have since a nuclear armed enemy will retaliate that way anyway . Hopefully the Dead Hand automated salted weapons systems son;t work. If that is used , for a few hundred years the only winners will be flour beetles
People of a certain age grew up thinking about all this when we were still at primary school. Welcome back to our childhood 🤣
Remind me not to watch Threads again...
Yup, Gen X here, so many films from my childhood were set in a post nuclear war world. The docudrama Threads comes to mind...
@@jatpack3 The only winning move is not to play.... How about a nice game of chess?
@@AndyFarnham all the Gen Xers 🥱🥱🥱 Really? We're here AGAIN??? Did everyone just stop studying history????
@@Valisk Make sure you keep anything sharp, any pills, and any rope out of reach for at least 2 hours after watching it!
I notice that nowhere in Wales is a target: probably not worth the hassle.
Sheep lives matter
Wales was gutted by thatcher and neglected by blair, so fortunately their lack of investment in regeneration means we'll be alright. Sweet!
@@pastorpresent7774You definitely have a point there: plus, the Russians don't have bilingual rockets, so they are not allowed to operate in Wales.
At the height of the Cold War, there were 200 nuclear warheads targetted at the UK. Are you telling me that cities like Swabnsea, Cardiff etc were not on that list? Think again boyo!
@@Hattonbank When the industry existed they definitely were. I'm pretty sure they're on the US target map as well. Need to look that up.
Thank you sir ! ( I'm a Brit living in washington D.C ) Yes, Britains nuclear deterrent in in fully under "sovereign", that is, totally under British control. Even though our nuclear SLBMs are American made. Britain is the only country which enjoys this "special relationship" with the USA. An interesting note....... Each time a new prime minister is elected in the UK, their first duty is to write a letter to the captains of our 4 nuclear submarines in the case of conflict, and subsequent "loss of contact" with the government. Ryan, you should research this. And yes, Britain would respond, likely with a full strike package.
Each week the captains enter the launch codes as a practice. They have their fingers crossed that the PM is not entering his/her codes at the same time -- but they don't actually know. This means they have no capability of countermanding a political decision to launch, and they can feel absolved of any moral responsibility if it's for real. They're just doing what they do every Tuesday. (Before you ask, it isn't always on a Tuesday.)
Britain's SLBMs are built at Barrow in Furness!
@@Aindriuh I do not believe the Submarine Launched Ballistic Missiles were built at Barrow ... but the TSSBNs ie Trident submarines were.
@@simonblakey5130 I have absolutely no inside knowledge, but for a whole array of reasons that does not sound at all plausible.
@@simonblakey5130 Looks like Russia would strike on a Wednesday then?
Well thanks Ryan, you have really brightened up my day! But in all seriousness, a really fascinating and informative video. Keep up the good work.
Got to admit, I'm from the central belt Scotland, this does sound chilling. Also motivates me to take up arms against Russia anyway I could.(Although it would be pointless in a nuclear scenario)
Nuclear war isn't the end of the world.
It won't be fine afterwards, but humanity can deal with it.
At least you would get to take a few out before you went tho
There needs to be a reason to use them first. If just messing up a country is your goal then great, but that doesn't help them win a war in Ukraine. Currently UK aren't actively in the war and neither are NATO, but they would be if they even tried to launch a missile against NATO.
@@SueMyChin not to mention this would certainly 100% beyond a shadow of doubt cause a massive nuclear retaliation from the U.S. and probably France.
@@SueMyChin f the entire world is pouring aid into the UK they aren't pouring it into Ukraine.
Lots of mentions of Threads, but does anyone remember the 'sweet' little animated film 'When the Wind Blows'?
Yeah, it’s got its funny moments.
@gailstephens777: I've still got it on DVD.
Do you mean the sitcom with Andy Millman?
Solid assessment. Now you should discuss the potential NATO response. You and I know that NATO has already war gamed this and many other scenarios. While we're at, how closely are you monitoring the key indicators of Russia's intent?
cold war era generals are creaming their pants right now. It's like someone who went to school for 20 years on some esoteric, nearly useless subject suddenly gets called into action and is suddenly relevant.
Many people thing that in government agency are some magic happen and they always know everything. But in reality they DONT..was NATO calculation that when they attack Lybia will fall in civil war that will never end..or did USA calculate that Kabul will fall in one day...i can do this all day
Russia would not exist anymore.
@@r.d.9399 nor the world, and certainly not Britain, there will be nothing left alive in the UK.... Russia has more nukes than USA (China not even included and they will certainly not support the US)
The fact that you prepared such a detailed and realistic video about Russia's nuclear attack on the UK shows how extraordinary days we are going through.
hell I live all the way across the pond from the UK and this video freaked me out lol
You all love the eighties so much they decided to show you some of it's lesser points..
There's a reason why GenX went all "whatever, nevermind.."
So far Russia has still not launched a single conventional missile or bomb against one NATO target despite the west supplying huge weaponry to the Ukraine.
Why do we think it is like that?
@@Aldarion65 I'm about 25 miles from Fawley and 37 miles from Portsmouth Naval Base, and Ryan says they should just be air bursts, so hopefully won't be too bad. I'll keep my head down for the explosion, then have a strong cup of tea, with biscuits of course, and carry on as normal.
@@tonyr4873
Being from the North Bank of the River Humber; if Russia decides to send all of its nukes to Immingham/Grimsby, then that's absolutely fine by us... It's not that we "hate" our Southbank neighbours, it's just that most of those other targets are so picturesque and populated with nice friendly people... North East Lincolnshire... Erm... Well they do have some good fish & chip shops I guess 😬
Edit:
I'm fully aware of the irony that someone living near Hull actually posted the above 🤣
Your closing statements place a lot more faith in our current political leaders than a lot of us in the UK have
The fact that he seriously thinks that Russia would wish to nuke the UK, over a military operation to take the territory that Russia has held for 2 years already is hilarious
Are politician s are useless in the UK
Don't forget in the 1930s the British Government were appeasing the Germans, hadn't begun militarization and were by many expected to come to some sort of agreement with the Germans.
The bit at the start about Churchill and co. made me laugh. Brave? Dresden anyone?
Wars and killing have never solved any damned thing. The idea that people are even thinking this way shows jut how broken we all are. Human race certainly needs to heal!
Ryan this video really sent chills down my spine. We're talking end of civilization here.
I believe Albert Einstein said I know not what weapons WW3 will be fought with, but WW4 will be fought with Stick's and Stone's.
Looking at it from a dispassionate scientific standpoint, I remember that anthropologists discovered chimpanzee tribes going to war against one another, when population pressure was high and resource abundance was low. I imagine there are specific genes that are activated under these conditions, and we probably inherited those same genes.
source?
100% agree, Kevin... I cannot believe that we're living in such a situation. Unfortunate that Russia does not realize their economy would've foster if they would've seek for collaborations. Instead of fighting / destroying one another on a planet as beautiful as Earth, we should focus on the survival of mankind and help one another.
@@busterkeyl but there's actually pretty few reasons to attack a country and convince them and the world that it was an accident
@@busterkeyl Russia has threatened recently to do that, 'sinking' the UK and completely innocent Ireland. I'm not sure they realise islands aren't floating...
The UK has a nuclear capability and would respond. I don’t think it’s a likely target on that basis. Interesting thought experiment though; albeit a terrifying one!
It depends on what the letter says, and the mind set of the PM who wrote it.
Russia would cease to be shortley after a strike on the UK...maybe many countries depending on how capable the russian remnants are to respond.
@@Duncan_Campbell pretty sure the nuclear deterrence covers for getting nuked… 😂
if russia would fire even one missile at the UK entire of Nato would be Involved remember article 5, it would literally be World War 3 abd russia can't be that stupid to acctually do that
Thank God CND didn't get their way
I have a British friend who lives in City of Plymouth, home of Devonport, Western Europe's largest naval base and Britain's only facility to refit and refuel their nuke sub fleet.
He was surprised that Plymouth was omitted from your strike list and also suggested that if it was targeted, several million pounds worth of improvement would be done.
"Several million pounds of improvements", more like £5. I love our UK humour of laughing at destruction and saying its an improvement.
I'd like to request RAF Boulmer be re-added to the list, with a polite request to avoid Mondays or Thursdays.
I'd also appreciate it if the FBI (Fishing Boat Inn) could be spared the worst of the blast.
Plymouth is not a target as it’s twinned with Novorossiysk😂😂😂
@William Tell erm, they are.
@William Tell no, they're fuelled at Devonport where they also conduct "deep maintenance", routine maintenance is conducted at Faslane.
Thank you, Ryan. You definitely "get" the British character. We don't shout out a lot, but we do carry a big stick.
Just one small bit of data to add to your NHS numbers. People forget that the UK also has private hospitals that you can go to just like in the USA, these would be available during an emergency. There is a total of 1,229 hospitals in the UK and 515 of them are private hospitals. Bed numbers are not made public but maybe in the region of 20k to 50k more and most likely to be based in large cities with most and biggest private hospitals being in London, alot of rich politicians on private health care there ;-)
And then there are the military field hospitals and the leftover plans from the covid pandemic and before which can turn schools and sports centres into hospitals as well. The retired medics along with volunteers and the military would also staff all the extra infrastructure. There are plans for mass casualty events at single or multiple locations.
Also storing the dead would not be as much as a strain as it could be as icerinks and industrial fridges would be used, the plans were revised during the pandemic.
How did hospitals there handle peak covid? Take that and times it by 10 and that's generally how well your Healthcare system will fare.
@@hitokiriizo It would cope, there may be less treatment of minor nonlife-threatening things but it would cope, never underestimate the ability of the British people to cope. It was exactly the miscalculation made during the second world war and we all know how that ended.
@@PhoebeK Its the politicians more than the people that worry me.
Lol hospitals in the UK are having trouble handling regular traffic now. They would quickly be overwhelmed by the injured.
As an Englishman, I am honoured by your kind words at the end about England and our historical figures who stared at evil in the face and confronted it. Thank you my American cousin.
Maybe you are not aware of the small details of The London Blitz.
@Ryan McBeth Knowledge is nvr wasted - I really appreciated your beautiful delivery & narrative (images, maps, explanatory captions) that you've assembled together quite thoughtfully; a lot of skill here for me to get the jist.
(But the only thing I couldn't expect you to now appreciate, is the Conservative gov during Covid, and no doubt this current one's, ability to strut on with "ideas" backed by zilch, or less than zero reference to those with adequate knowledge, bk ground & experience. The current UK political ministers R likely to make really poor decisions (as happened during Covid) if the Ruskies use the UK as expendable collateral to make their point 2 the rest of the West. I do wish Scientists WERE running the UK politically - it's needed).
Keep it coming Ryan; enjoyed it a lot.
💜💜💜
He failed to mentioned they were looking in the mirror.
@@CollieJenn ... LOL. Good one.
Having served on Vanguard class Submarines, I can attest that the continuous at sea deterrent would certainly be unleashed on Russia in such a situation. What’s left of Russia would then have to deal with a response from NATO.
Make sure that you have iodine tablets, first aid kits, supplies, a shelter and a holy book. God bless Germany, India and Africa.
But doesn't each sub carry no more than 40 warheads, and if Faslane is destroyed in a pre-emptive strike that leaves only 1 boat able to respond. We should be arming all subs with the maximum complement of missiles & warheads and aim to have 2 boats on patrol at all times.
Bear in mind the U.K. wouldn’t be on its own, not just one Sub, many!!
@@brendanpells912 The number of missiles on board and the number of boats at sea depends on the current global situation, the last time we only had one boat at sea would have been 9 years ago before Russia invaded Ukraine for the first time.
@@glennbutler2070 Depends if the US backs us up. Imagine Trump was President again. The destruction is limited to the UK, he might say let's stop at that, he's done a deal with Putin where the US doesn't respond in return for Russia not attacking the US mainland. The UK alone should be able to unilaterally respond with the ability to inflict catastrophic damage to Russia, and I can believe that Putin would gamble that 40 warheads on a country the size of Russia would cause an acceptably low level of damage.
The only winning move is not to play
Fun fact, right next to the Oil refinery at Stanlow is a company called Lubrizol, they are one of only two places in the world that decommission chemical weapons. So that combined with a nuclear explosion at an oil refinery would cause some skin peelingly spectacular effects.
Scousers getting the worst as per 😒 .
There's also the nuclear waste reprocessing place at Capenhurst.
I live in Wirral, and drive past Stanlow weekly. I should not have watched this when heading to bed. Although I will be sure to update on the skin peeling.
I sense a comic book or rpg series coming on....
@@nicksteele9436capenhurst isnt just a waste facility it is a nuclear enrichment facility.
As a kid during the Cuban missile crisis my dad told me not to worry about a nuclear war because the Russians weren't insane. However a limited nuclear war is winnable if you can contain it to a limited nuclear strike and there is the catch 22. A tactical nuke can be used very close to friendly troops and assets.
It’s like trying to contain an outbreak of the bubonic plague
there is no way you can use any nuke it would be straight escalation .
"As a kid during the Cuban missile crisis my dad told me not to worry about a nuclear war because the Russians weren't insane."
Perhaps they weren't then. But they certainly seem to be now.
The Cuban missile crisis was, like this war, started by the Americans. They placed missiles in Italy & Turkey close enough to take out Moscow before a response. Russia responded with the missiles in Cuba. It was resolved when BOTH sides removed their missiles. Admitting Ukraine to NATO is the same all over again and the Russians are not having it.
Are you blaming the USA for Russia's invasion of Ukraine?
What twisted chain of logic leads you to that conclusion?
The data centers, while destroyed, the data may not be lost. When the towers in New York City on 9/11 were hit, some data centers were destroyed, but there were redundant data centers clear across the country that had the backups for these data centers. One major stock market trading company lost only one transaction due to the attack. Yes, loss of personnel would still be a lot. Thanks for the breackdown.
The two DCs in London are primary and backup I believe.
@@Strawberrybell0 Even so there are many other smaller dater centres across the UK and Ireland which would take the strain. The UK has silly levels of redundancy and even now the government could still work reliant on military and industry infrastructure which can be separated form the wider civilian inferstucture.
The problem is the most critical infrastructure normally has legal requirements to be stored within the country and AWS is the biggest provider by far. Even data that can be stored outside the country will most likely only be on the nearest datacenter for latency and off-country backups to survive nuclear strikes will never, ever be in budget. You'd be surprised how bad the state of backups are in almost every company.
I wouldn't be surprised if taking out UK AWS will disrupt most of the internet on the island as well, since the telecoms probably rely on it too in some form.
@@Strawberrybell0 When I worked in a data center we always told customers to have three copies of their data. One in house, one geographically remote, and one offline in a separate remote location. Sadly only about half of our customers actually had a separate backups, and maybe one in four actually had all three. Typically the larger the company the more serious they took their backups.
@@PhoebeK There's at least 1 such data centre not far from me and plenty of others. I suspect the real problem initially would be getting the data from there to anyone that could use it!
I remember quite vividly the Cuban Missile Crisis. America didn’t want Russian Missiles in Cuba near the coast of the US so I am probably going to be controversial but I can sympathise with the position NATO has put Putin in.
Surely what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
NATO hasn't moved any nukes into any of its new member countries. Not even the Kremlin makes that claim (though Russian media have successfully stoked up that fear in their population). And on becoming independent, Ukraine gave all its nukes to Russia in return for a guarantee to respect its boundaries.
In the 1980s i knew someone who was a member of the Royal Observation Corps. He operated from a bunker near Skipsea on the east coast. He had a file with statics and projections of what was expected if a nuclear bomb fell on Kingston Upon Hull. This is near Immingham, on the Humber estuary. He also had a file about the identification of Soviet Aircraft. These files were not supposed to be seen by the public but he took them to work to study during his breaks.
that bunker is open some weekends to visit! very interesting, and some of the original staff still volunteer there :D
My grandad was a chief observer, I loved reading his books.
@@fluffy3953 intresting. I live a bit further away now but must visit.
@@gavinreid2741 I believe it is called RAF Holmpton
What a load of bollox - if this guys had any real insight into the likeliest target for Russia v UK this would be a list of secondary targets at best. I am not going to share the first strike list for national security reasons, suffice it to say they are known and back up/ relocation sites are in place. The commentator is simply a communist sympathiser and fifth columnist spreading fear amongst the UK population. If his propaganda had any traction he would have been arrested, charged and imprisoned by now.
I come for the shorts, but I've stuck around for the regular videos. Excellent work as always my friend
I put off watching this out of fear of what I might learn. You didn’t disappoint.
I am glad you said you do not think this will happen considering I live in the UK
As a former resident of Immingham I'll point out that the Conoco oil refinery is well within blast radius of the docks if the nuke is an airburst of any considerable size and would therefore cause massive damage there.
Local workers at the refinery always said that if that place went up it would blast a corner of the UK off the map.
Thankfully I've moved back down south now but I clearly remember the view of the flames from Conoco from my bedroom window in the distance.
Humberside airport is also not far from there so there are lots of reasons Immingham would be on the nuke map.
As a UK citizen and former member of HM Armed Forces, I can wholeheartedly say that you are 100% correct in your analysis of our response. I was merely a low-level grunt but I assure you that our appetite would be one that can be compared to Connery's speech in 'Untouchables'. The one about hospitals and morgues.....
No worries we won't know what struck us but the next species would eventually find out.
russia is a huge place huge
@@brenohighland3259 But industry and population is concentrated in large cities, just like Canada, US, Europe
I love your content, couldn't finish this one though. Got a panic attack. Me and my family live about 10km from Stanlow. There are 2 things providing me with comfort. There a lot of secret R&D projects within NATO and there is at least 1 nuclear strike sub hidden at sea at all times.
dont fool yourself - - sometimes own nations do it to there own people - why - to get the country to war ! why do that - every war is about population control - kill the young - they dont have a family - might sound evil to you but thats the world we live in
No worries we won't know what struck us but the next species would eventually find out.
Luckily me and my family live 10.5km away so we'll be fine.
I know how you feel, RAF Brize Norton is similarly close to me and I'm genuinely surprised to not see it mentioned.
I believe that, much like Russia's armour in Ukraine, ICBMs won't deliver their expected performance. We could shoot down ICBMs with limited success forty years ago; I have no idea what the modern approach is but I imagine it's pretty good (for an unthinkable situation, at least).
My main concern would actually be whether our political elite respond in any useful way. At the moment I wouldn't trust our government with a Starbucks order, let alone a coordinated military strategy. That's what makes us vulnerable.
@@opossums-will-sing The United Kingdom does not maintain any form of national ballistic missile defence. It relies purely on its deterrent capability.
Could I add the House of Commons please. Wednesday lunchtime. Not during the holidays. Thanks Vlad.
half the buggers would still not be there unfortunately.
As a former soldier, the best place to be is close to the epicentre - you *do not* want to survive a nuclear attack. The instructions for doing so are for military personnel to continue ground combat - just look at Pripyat.
Thanks again, Mr Stanislav Petrov, for us still being here. 👍
The one good man from a evil race
@@nicholasholden1896
☹️ othering people is always dangerous.
And this is the exact reason the UK should never give up its independent, sea based, nuclear weapons. Even if the submarines lose contact with the command structure in the UK they will have instructions on what actions to take, including predefined targets. When some people in this country call for it to be scrapped because "it's never going to be used", they are wrong; it is in use as a deterrent every single day, 24/7/365.
Or, maybe why don't our corrupt politicians stop funding and facilitating endless wars, then we wouldn't be under any nuclear threat
UK Trident doesnt work, its been sabotaged by WEF stooges
Two failed launches? Yea right purtin shitting himself.
So, what happens on leap year?
They have a nice cup of tea. Well they are British.
I live in Portsmouth about 2 miles from the naval base. I have always said that if the warning came I would put the kettle on and have a last cup of tea and maybe a packet of biscuits.
and a Marmite sandwich. Probably contains iodine.
I live right next to RAF Fylingdales, and have been in the command centre (operation room) many times (my girlfriend's father worked there until retiring). I've been fortunate enough to witness simulated missile attack procedures/test drills in response to an incoming missile from Russia and the Southern Atlantic Ocean. I've even walked the long, piped walls within which runs endlessly like a maze. It's an incredibly well-built structure for its time, and a lot of their critical infrastructure is actually underground, despite the high facades you see in pictures. Up until recently, there were multiple radar domes (looked like golf balls) scattered around Fylingdales that acted as a "signal booster" (in laymen terms), but the site itself is now so powerful, that these domes are now out of commission/deconstructed. Fylingdales does have various contingencies in place to resume radar operation should any of the main active panels or radars be destroyed or attacked.
It's an incredibly efficient operation, and despite the 60's-like use of corded telephones (to contact public services, the Government and of course, the RAF), AND the fact residents around here (which is few) aren't allowed to use energy smart meters as there are fears the rollout of the technology would interfere with the radar itself (crazy, I know), it's still a powerful tool in the UK's defence backyard. It's also a beautiful sight;--both inside and out--along the long, straight interior walls of the radar facades (they're all angled corridors slightly), and to witness just how well-protected the country is via a powerful over-the-horizon EWRS radar reassures me that I might not be in any blast zones any time soon!
Eyyup, another local lad ey
Being in a blast zone might stop the rubber-dinghy boat pirate invasion, and crash property prices, and decimate the population. So, there'd be no traffic jams, and plenty of space to build new stuff etc. Even the nuclear cloud has a silver lining.
@@margaretblack8538 - Your Gov refused to stop a rubber dinghy boat pirate invasion, during an unprecedented global plandemic and national lockdown. The reason we have these Governments, is because women get to vote. So, this is basically all your fault. If Russia ruled Britain everything would be much better.
e
Corded phones are more likely to survive nuclear war than are mobile networks, and no radar on earth can stop a missile - so that blast zone is still a very real possibility. But at least you'll be able to use one of those old technology phones to tell someone about it!
I was a teenager in 1962 during the Cuban missile crisis and can remember very clearly the tension and anxiety everyone felt when president Kennedy issued his ultimatum to Russian concerning the missiles which were on their way to Cuba. We knew that we could be just hours away from a nuclear attack , and that is why I am quite worried at the moment that someone will do something stupid and bring others into the present middle east conflict.
My concern is France, Poland and some other countries really advancing into the western Ukraine, get smashed and double down with their air forces including the airfoce of the USA and finally Russia sending nuclear missiles into western Europe as a repsonse. The response to that nuclear weapons into Russia. Then what?
I was in Jr high school, in nyc. The girls were just crying. We figured it was all over.
You really can't understand the fear we had. It may have started the hippie movement. Might as well party, while waiting for end.
I remember the Cuban missle Chris as well just about the whole civilised world whatever that means held it breath for about two weeks until Russia and the U.S got it sorted out diplomatically
It was very close could kicked at any minute...
Some of us Brits are aware of 'other' locations for our subs to get serviced, so it would be a setback but not a loss. The data centres widely known to the public are that way, to distract from the hidden ones. Being an Island we have lots of ports, so redirection is the main requirement to keep supplies moving.
If used, the nuclear weapons carried by just one Trident submarine could directly cause more than 10 million civilian casualties on Russia and there are 6 of them.
He listed Amazon's AWS datacentres... As if that is what the UK's digital infrastructure is reliant on not sure how he came to this conclusion it's as if he just looked for the biggest data centres and listed them. You're right about the ports as well we have a LOT of them supplies can be redirected quite easily.
Russia has a lot more nuclear weapons than Britain has, also they still have a massive bunker system for their population, unfortunately for us, we have none and unlike us , they still maintain a very large Civil defence . The Russians, even going back to soviet times never adopted the concept of Mutual assured destruction.
Most of the launch systems are buggered as recent tests proved.
4*
@@farquarhoffe7862 One on duty.
*Annie Jacobson* said it best "There is no limited nuclear war, it only ends one way... total armageddon"
Ryan, all accurate analysis and target prediction - however, you should up the 'warheads expended' count to attain your results. Planning stats in the 1980s was Soviet systems were expected to be ~75% reliable. In hindsight this may have been optimistic. Current Russian missile reliability is running ~65% plus or minus 5% depending on who you ask.
So to hit 10 targets they wouldn't use 12 warheads in two SS-N-32s (the Borei carry 16 of the Bulava R-30, NATO code nomenclature SS-N-32); to attain a to-hit ratio of 98%, they'd probably target 3x warheads per target; so 30 warheads or 5 missiles. As poorly as the SS-N-32 was during trials, that could be upped to 4 per target, or 7 missiles.
Yes, just a numbers game but the poor reliability of their systems in general equates to less options for targeting confidence overall.
10 targets in the UK alone is likely grossly under their plans; extrapolate that to all nato nations to include the USA, Australia, Japan - any place that has US bases or is staunchly pro US - and it adds up quick - and they thus use up warheads quick.
Not sure I agree with your perspective on the analysis (although it's an interesting scenario), but I do wholeheartedly agree with you regarding the highly questionable reliability of the Russian strategic missile force.
It is likely much worse than the second war. The incredibly high rate of launch failures during the testing of the SS-N-30 is a great example.
The first set of tests couldn't even make it off the launch platform, let alone into the atmosphere.
Agreed though US weapons also have reliability issues with tritium. parts and possibly classified material . We could end up very lucky where everything gets used but so much of it doesn't work the societies survive,
Counter ballistics also need to be taken into account.
@@simonacerton3478 The difference is that Russia has a lot more targets to hit, where as NATO have more missiles and less ground to cover. A nuclear scenario wouldn't look good for anyone, but it looks especially bleak for Russia.
The UK knows about their data center vulnerabilities. That's why they also have offshore/out-of-country backup operations.
Hope ur right hi from Oxford
@@catfish4729 Rosehill > the rest
That won't get the fibre optics working again
@@zyeborm no, but communications don't entirely rely on fibre optics.
Especially when you are talking government/military/infrastructure communications.
All luxury transmissions can cease, leaving whatever capacity is left for essential comms.
Plenty of copper line, satellites, small radio transmitters and of course physical data transfer methods exist if FO is disrupted.
Plus, I'm betting that the loss of those centres won't disrupt the networks as much as you think. Plenty of hidden data centres, connections and "hubs" around the UK. It's a fascinating topic.
Even the target list in this video doesn't list a more important site for UK data and Fibre Optics.
Russia will certainly have to pick their targets well if they intend on a hard enough hit to cripple the nation without leading to a nuclear response from more than just Britain.
That real list of targets will make the difference between crippling and pissing off Britain!
@@zyeborm But the data will still be intact and safe
Thing about the U.K. is… Like the US, we’ve got RAF and Naval bases in other countries. Also, it’s difficult for Russian subs to leave a dock without being tailed.
We recently tested one of our nuclear missiles, it flipped over 3 times and splashed in the ocean next to the submarine (Rule Britannia.)
Our new counter strike plan is to send them in the post.
The Royal Navy has an 83% success rate with test firing Trident.
Data centers are all backed up at remote locations in many cases hardened locations. As an IT professional I would expect you to know this. This is primarily to protect against natural disasters, but is very effective for military attacks as well.
Yes, bit surprised he didn't note that. Without doxxing myself too much I'm in felixstowe, work in IT and yes we have multi-site disaster recovery!
Depends on the datacenter...
@@dallysinghson5569 Not in the UK, they are all backed up in other locations at least twice.
As somebody who works in datacentre automation and spends a lot of time in them: nonsense. Nobody, but nobody, backs up datacentres. You back up critical data you use in them. That is not at all the same thing. In a DC of 10k servers you could depending on the US only see a couple of TB of data you need to keep - others it can be much more.
Think of the tens, or hundreds of thousands of connections which link into that data centre, will all be destroyed. With those connections lost it's irrelvant if the "data centres are backed up" as those customers (most of london) will not have resiliant data links to other data centres. Also Data centres may have dual redunancy but they wont be entireley 'backed up'.
Having once worked in the IT department of a major bank, I know that all data of the nature you described gets backed up at least on a daily basis or where deemed critical, on the fly.
Either by dedicated high speed fibre optics or to tapes. In both cases the back ups end up miles away from their original locations, with a carefully planned (and rehearsed) procedure and infrastructure to get things up and running again very quickly.
Regarding such an extensive nuclear attack on the UK, I'm more inclined to believe that the powers that be's response to NATO's 'Take it on the chin' approach will be more along the lines of 'Not a chance, but care to join us old boy?' and if any of American proposed targets are hit, then there will certainly be instantaneous retaliation of a greater magnitude from across the pond.
I;m not sure why he called Sovereign house AWS, they have stuff there probably, but it’s not their DC. They would probably hit the AWS and Azure infrastructure, but there are a cluster of datacenters around Sov which and also a few out to the east owned by Telecity which would mean the uk internet capability would be gone instantly. I’m not sure why you would nuke them though when convential weapons delivered hypersonically would be just as effective. I don’t think the scenario of using a Nuclear weapon really exists tactically, it is purely a message, and ultimately a roll of the dice for compliance or end game.
I've also once worked in a couple of banks in IT. But look at it, your prized Disaster Recovery Tapes are miles away and you've got to A] send an email to someone - which won't work cause the infrastructure is down B] phone someone - disruption to mobile phone and comms networks, C] send a carrier pigeon - disorientated due to ionizing radiation, to get a message that you need your tapes. Assuming they, Iron Mountain or who ever are still alive, what are they going to do ? EMP taken out all the electronics in modern trucks, assuming they'll spend the diesel to get the tapes to you as they may have enough Diesel to get to you but not back to base, and the workforce, if they've turned up for work, your going to be their priority ?
Assuming if the tapes do arrive, your focus is not on your survival or that of your family, what will you do ? Go on Amazon and order a couple of dozen servers for next day delivery ? Where is your kit going to come from ? And where is the power and connectivity going to go ? What do you plan to do ? Hook it all into the world stock markets which require those bombed out data centres or as many ATM machines in the towns near you ?
Do you really think in such a situation people will walk to an ATM to get money to buy the goods they need when the risk of radiation is high, to pay for things at the shop that has no online banking facilities or perhaps even electricty ? OR will they just walk in, take what they can carry and walk out ?
A question I've never asked - will the 'smart debit card in your pocket work after an EMP strike ?" And who is going to care ?
I think there is Disaster Recovery plans and then there are Disaster Recovery Plans. This isn't the kind of disaster that disaster recovery is intended to cope with.
@@alexwild4350 These plans were originally implemented when the I.R.A was causing significant but localised damage around the cities of England. The point I was making was not that everything would be up and running ok within 24 hours but contradicting the authors point of view that as you seem to think, that the described targets will evoke total Armageddon. Regarding EMP, it will need much much more than half a dozen nuclear explosions to completely knock out the whole of England's electrical and electronic infrastructure. Was Tokyo and the rest of Japan affected this way by the bombs that fell on Nagasaki and Hiroshima. No the damage was localised.
I totally agree with you that everyone will be up the proverbial creek without a paddle in this digital age if there was a total EMP strike across England but it is my belief that a strike of this magnitude could only be implemented by extraterrestrial sources.
But that is not why I posted my comment
@@TinSandwichUK you miss the whole point of video it's not suppose to cause armageddon but create as much panic and as much chaos as possible and not being able to get your data for 2 days will cause a lot of companies to not be able to work properly for weeks
@@Tensaii1 Read what I said properly regarding my use of the word Armageddon.
*Note* Faslane (HNMB Clyde) also houses US Subs from time to time.
(Lucky to be able to see subs go up and down the Clyde from time to time from where I live.)
So a nice bright light if it went up.
That last bit went hard
These long form videos are amazing! I know they take up much more time than short form content, and I bet they rake in less traffic, but they are the key to build a long and lasting community on UA-cam!
Labas
my guy it's 15 minutes long
@@adm_ezri I know, but his normal content is 40 seconds long.
When I was a child, during the Cold War around 1984 I lived in rural Northamptonshire. Small villages and towns, nothing of importance for bombs to be aimed at. Safe away from the big cities. Or so it seamed. Molesworth, which was Greenham Common's twin brother storing nuclear weapons was 5 miles away and there was an early warning station 2 miles away. It turned out my area was probably one of the first locations to be bombed. Both sites were decommissioned after the Cold War which was a blessed relief. Sadly, we are back to 1984.
Sad? Ww3 will destroy my landlord and his bank balance, all i have to do is outlive him to die happy.
@@olivere5497 i wish you well and hope you live a long and happy life
@@brenohighland3259 cool.
Crazy times we live in, back to the cold war
The cold war never ended
Except now people can communicate with each other practically no matter where they are, instantly, face to face, and send and recieve video..
It's the cold war but with the internet
I feel this is different, Russia has been tested and shown to be "less than expected"
My generation does not live in fear of a nuclear bomb. I, personally, can't do a thing if a nuclear attack is to happen, other than be prepared... As much as possible.
Thanks to inept and cowardice Democrats in the White House
You missed out the importance of Southampton. Fawley refinery is located on Southampton water and just 3 miles away is the city of Southampton and the second largest container port after Felixstowe. Also there is Marchwood military port between the refinery and the docks. That area would produce some very rich pickings for any enemy.
You didn't watch the video then?
As someone from the Uk. This was bone chilling to watch. Scary to see how possible this is.
McBeth's best video. Broaches a delicate topic with the brevity and straightforwardness that's been his thing. A+, Sgt.
And yes, I would think by now that Vlad knows that he really only has the backing of Kim Jong Il. Otherwise, China isn't ready to "go there" to that dance with Vlad, so, really, he's alone if he decides to nuke the UK. And I would agree Sgt, that Britain is indeed ready and Russia's fate is sealed if they tried such a gambit.
It’s Fy~lingdales not Fly~ingdales, known locally as the golf balls, however I think it got upgraded and the large white radomes have now gone.
They have indeed gone - some years ago. There are some smaller ones at Menwith Hill near Harrogate.
Very interesting and I believe your absolutely correct about us in the U.K. we aren’t scared of evil it’s something we’ve stood against time and time again and I’ve no doubt we’ll do it again if forced to
Very different people in England at the time lol I can't imagine what it would look like
@@bruderschweigen6889 might be a very different type of people, but one thing that’s a certain guarantee, the People of the UK will come together just as our forefathers did, no matter where people of UK originate from!
Why do you think mainland UK has never been invaded since 1066?🇬🇧✊🏽
@@Milky_LUFC Because we offer nothing to an invading army. Unlike Europe where there are vast gains to be had in land and resources.
In the 1980's one of the first targets would have been Bracknell South of London as it was the home of the MET office. It was a major target as without knowledge of the weather it would make military planning far more difficult.
Started drinking heavily at about 8 minutes in. Cheers!
One year later and the UK’s latest trial saw our trident just fall into the sea 😂
The Tridents are getting old, corrosion is taking its toll, gaskets and O-rings are falling apart and the electronics are ancient. A modern activity bracelet has more calculating power than the guidance system, so Trident is more than outdated as a deterrent.
@@jannevellamo whatever it is, it’s not a good look for the UK or US
I think you are forgetting Plymouth.
It's always been a military city, it's got nuclear submarines and several RAF Bases, and a relatively small population for a British city.
An our biggest naval base. But no ships! The the most capable ships in the fleet (the carriers and the Type 45s - when they are not being fixed, of course) are based at Portsmouth. But the our most capable vessels of all are not the ships, but the boats all operating out of Faslane. And, of course, the nuclear warheads are stored under the hill the other side of the Loch.
@@adriangoodrich4306 Devonport is the home to the Amphibious fleet, half of the U.K.'s Frigate fleet, Several Nuclear Subs and numerous RFA's and of course the weapons depot at Ernesettle...I'd say it's getting a nuke of it's own.
Damn, the ending of this video sent shivers down my spine. Well said Sir!