The Impact Would Be Global From A Small Nuclear War

NATO Nuclear strategy

David Bressan, Forbes: Even A Small Nuclear War Would Still Have Effects On Global Scale

On Nov. 1, 1983, leading Russian and American scientists -- including author Carl Sagan -- discussed the possible consequences of a nuclear war. Apart from the immediate destruction of infrastructure and the loss of millions of lives, the scientists were mostly concerned about the possible aftermath of such a war. The detonation of some hundreds of atomic bombs would cause a nuclear winter, with disastrous impacts on the environment and human food resources. The ash and dust, transported by the atomic blasts into the higher layers of Earth's atmosphere, would form a cloud layer, making it impossible for sunlight and heat to reach the surface. Dropping temperatures would plunge Earth into a nuclear winter, maybe for decades or even centuries. Plants, no longer able to produce nutrients by photosynthesis, would quickly die off, followed by the starving animals and finally humans.

Read more ....

WNU Editor: Will a limited nuclear war result in a nuclear winter? The above author says that the use of 50 - 100 tactical nukes would produce firestorms that would send five to 6 million tons of dust, ash and soot into the atmosphere. But Mount St. Helens when it exploded in 1980 sent an estimated 540 million tons (490,000 kilotons) of ash drifted up to 2,200 square miles (5,700 square km), settling over seven states. (Live Science). There was temperature drop, but it quickly recovered. The biggest global impact of a limited nuclear war will be political, economic, and social.