This is something I've been thinking about. I mean even in the old days, aircraft have always been able to intercept missiles. I picture a lot of interception taking place in a real nuclear war, where air superiority fighters end up escorting their own nukes, trying to intercept other nukes, and even nukes being used against other nukes.

Yes, it does seem very ham handed to use nukes against other nukes, except it's not. If regular interception fails and there is a large enemy escort, then using a nuke against the nuke and it's escort becomes a feasible option. If you can't defeat the air escort then using a nuke against another nuke to prevent the loss of many many lives and extremely important strategic assets makes it worth it.

And yes, I know planes don't have as much fuel as long range nukes that can hit just about any place in the world from any other point, but this doesn't stop interceptors from being used. Planes will be scrambled at the right times, in correct anticipation for enemy actions. Planes I believe are much much faster than WMDs correct?

Perhaps this is already something brought up? Obvious things I'm not thinking of perhaps?

I think about this issue because of the recent escalation between Russia and America regarding the issue of Ukraine.

I just think that an all out nuclear war would lead to perhaps a more conventional war than we've been led to believe, perhaps even take months instead of days. Sure, some major cities and strategic bases will probably be taken out and reduced to craters, some missiles will slip through the cracks, but it couldn't be more than half of the mostly populated areas of the world, maybe even less.

⌐■_■╭∩ ?

Second, I think you should do some research about nuclear weapon delivery systems.
Nuclear missiles escorted by aircraft? Where did you come up with that?
ICBM's use MIRV's that eject warheads that rain down on earth with the speed of meteorites.

And in case of multiple nuclear detonations eventually the atmosphere will get saturated with radioactive particles that remains lethal for hundreds (maybe more) of years, you won't be able to breath without an airfiltrationsystem even on the other side of the planet where perhaps no nuclear detonations took place.

I don't think it would matter if they hit their targets, total annihilation would come from the fallout.

They were in the 60s, all of them; see "Fail Safe" or "Dr. Strangeglove" (spell).

There are still nuke payloads carried by aircraft but I don't know how much or where compared to the 80s when there were sorties at all times over the Bearing Strait.

Honest answer?

Who cares.

If the warmongers decide that it's time for a third world war, all the worries of the pawns in the game (aka: you and me, buddy) won't change a bit about it.

Like in any other war ever (be it in the past, still ongoing, or yet to come) the little man has to endure whatever comes and try to survive.

And if they drop A-bombs or if they send tanks and grunts - the world as we know it, will be another one afterwards.

i dont think they still carry nuclear warheads with manned aircraft if they were to be carried they would use drones like predators, ever tried to intercept a predator? good luck with that and i dont think it would take months may 2 or lets be generous 3 days but mostlikely it would be over right after the first warhead hits a country with nuclear power plants, all that radioactivity which is then released into all layers of our atmosphere would kill us faster than any war

Speaking of targets, and heed my advice on this one: NEVER EVER park next to an Air Force base!

Yes but he said misseles escorted by aircraft, I think even nuclear cruisemissiles attract less attention when they aren't escorted.
A nuclear missile against groups of bombers was actually a weapon for some time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIR-2_Genie

Ever heard of Metro 2033?

Just make sure you keep a few caps on a drawer. Just in case.

Oh, that's me giving the finger to the douchebags who spam voted me into such massive negative rep. That's what happens when you talk about even remotely sensitive issues on a forum. Bitches be fucking crazy. If talk about communism or homosexuality, even if you aren't fanatic yourself and you try to steer into a logical discussion, suddenly you're a troll, suddenly you're rude.

And fuck people that even say I was partially to blame. Having a contrary opinion to another's and then retaliating against somebody that flamebaits is not wrong.

Basically I tried to voice my libertarian opinions, which I'm not so adamant about anymore, but even if I was objectively wrong, the way people handled me was wrong. I mean I even mentioned homosexuality. They claimed that I was just like "all the other republicans" because I used the word faggot or something. I think I said something along the lines of "there's nothing wrong with homosexuals, but I find the stereotypical eccentric types really obnoxious and annoying, and such obnoxious behavior is definitely a choice."

You didn't ask for my life story, but I gave it to you. Sorry :)

I've learned my lesson; don't test the trollcalling trolls of the taboo police force.

Oh, but this topic is about nukes. Well... sorry gotta go to work. Maybe I'll respond about the actual topic when I get back.

Also, when I'm talking about escort, you shouldn't be picturing the planes flying in formation right next to the missile or something. Interceptor combat would take place probably very very far from the actual missile, and nobody would be forming around the missile, needless to say. Very long range, very "meta" warfare. In the same way a battlegroup might escort another battlegroup on a strategic level, not necessarily a tactical one.

Oh sorry. To be honest I didn't read the OP'S whole post. :P I lived the bulk of my childhood under the fear of nuclear death and whence the USSR collapsed I decided to stop thinking about it. :D

...and JCD I got massivley derepped the other day for saying it would be cool if GOG had 'Z', so please lighten up. You know damn well why your rep is so low; I've seen your earlier post. Coming in with the moniker "Liberal: Burn" and gay bashing is not bringing up a "sensitive subject" it's hate mongering and baiting.

You need nothing to be sorry about I'm a cold war kid too. ;)

And all the while I was reading Misha :D and watching the Olympics.