Estimation of Number of Nuclear Conflict Victims?

In a moderate-range, limited nuclear exchange between two nations, how many peopld would die?
Say a conflict between China and the US in 2000s, or limited USSR-China one.

Thanks in advance!
 

Pangur

Donor
In a moderate-range, limited nuclear exchange between two nations, how many peopld would die?
Say a conflict between China and the US in 2000s, or limited USSR-China one.

Thanks in advance!

How limited is limited? Are cities attacked or military concentrations?
 
Immediate deaths or eventual from all the fallout?

China has a lot of population concentration. I can't see the USSR holding back from hitting major cities if it came to it.
 
The limited nuclear exchange is a Cold War myth, especially in regards to any conflict between the USSR and the PRC.

I think it depends on between which two(or more) countires the exchange is, and what is the purpose. For example a study from some time ago of an exchange between Israel and Iran left 200-800 thousand Israelis and 16-20 million Iranians dead in a situation where both tried to destroy the other.

Now that is not something that is very reasonable, since there is no reason for any to destroy the other. Despite Israel's official stance, Iran has no interest in nuking Israel. In any scenario where Iran does, Israel has no reason to go all "Sampson option", because that is pure myth, no one is going to nuke Iranian cities for attacking Israeli cities. It will be a tactical attack against Iranian military instalations as part of an invasion of Iran to topple the regime which(in this scenario) is quite clearly insane.

There is also the possibilty of using a nuclear weapon to signal to the other to back off, for example blowing one up in a remote area during a war you are losing to signal to the other nation you are desperate, and are wiling to go down that path.
 
Last edited:
Ian posted a link somewhere that described how, due to fallout and proximity to population centers, a nuclear attack aimed at destroying China's nuclear deterrent alone would kill six million people.

I remember reading some "window of vulnerability" scenarios from the 1970s (there was apparently fear the Soviets could pull a successful nuclear first-strike on the American nuclear arsenal) that depicted a death toll of around ten million. And that'd be just from hitting ICBM fields, bomber bases, etc.

There's some kind of app online in which one can pick a location, pick the megatonnage, and then estimate the results. Devise a scenario and apply accordingly.
 
Ian posted a link somewhere that described how, due to fallout and proximity to population centers, a nuclear attack aimed at destroying China's nuclear deterrent alone would kill six million people.

I remember reading some "window of vulnerability" scenarios from the 1970s (there was apparently fear the Soviets could pull a successful nuclear first-strike on the American nuclear arsenal) that depicted a death toll of around ten million. And that'd be just from hitting ICBM fields, bomber bases, etc.

There's some kind of app online in which one can pick a location, pick the megatonnage, and then estimate the results. Devise a scenario and apply accordingly.

You're thinking of NukeMap, I believe.
 
Limited as in only those two powers are in war, and no one else.
Major cities, capital, and strategic sites are hit.
 
Limited as in only those two powers are in war, and no one else.
Major cities, capital, and strategic sites are hit.

A limited Sino-American war would have Taiwan as the flashpoint. If nuclear weapons are used, I could imagine American carrier battle groups and nearby military bases being the target. The goal would be destroy American power in the western Pacific long enough to take Taiwan and then present a fait accompli.

The problem is, hitting military bases includes Japan and Okinawa. Lots of Japanese with radiation sickness and eyes melting out of their heads on the 24-7 news cycle is going to make ending the war without escalation-retribution kind of problematic.

(And the last time an Asian power tried that strategy, it ended with them getting ground underfoot and nuked.)

Dale Brown wrote a scenario featuring a limited Sino-American nuclear conflict that depicts the Chinese as winning--either he overestimated Chinese nuclear capabilities or the U.S. wasn't willing to escalate beyond the tactical level.

Maybe after being on the receiving end of nuclear weapons for the second time, the Japanese decide to reach an understanding with China and refuse to cooperate with the U.S. plans for reprisal? The U.S. could fire ICBMs at China, but without bases in Japan, fighting the war could get really difficult.
 
A limited Sino-American war would have Taiwan as the flashpoint. If nuclear weapons are used, I could imagine American carrier battle groups and nearby military bases being the target. The goal would be destroy American power in the western Pacific long enough to take Taiwan and then present a fait accompli.

The problem is, hitting military bases includes Japan and Okinawa. Lots of Japanese with radiation sickness and eyes melting out of their heads on the 24-7 news cycle is going to make ending the war without escalation-retribution kind of problematic.

(And the last time an Asian power tried that strategy, it ended with them getting ground underfoot and nuked.)

Dale Brown wrote a scenario featuring a limited Sino-American nuclear conflict that depicts the Chinese as winning--either he overestimated Chinese nuclear capabilities or the U.S. wasn't willing to escalate beyond the tactical level.

Maybe after being on the receiving end of nuclear weapons for the second time, the Japanese decide to reach an understanding with China and refuse to cooperate with the U.S. plans for reprisal? The U.S. could fire ICBMs at China, but without bases in Japan, fighting the war could get really difficult.

Amd how many casualties in these scenarios (yours and Browns)?
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
Even a limited nuclear conflict between the USA and the PRC would kill over a hundred million people, possibly many more.
 
In a moderate-range, limited nuclear exchange between two nations, how many peopld would die?
Say a conflict between China and the US in 2000s, or limited USSR-China one.

Thanks in advance!

I think it depends on how messy you want your nuclear war to be, but the body count will probably range from a couple of milliion to a couple of billion. However, if we are talking about a nuclear war between China and the United States, then I think that the death toll will be some where between ten and a hundred million, again it depends on how messy you want your war to be, but a war between China and the United States is liable to be fairly messy.
 
Today.....there probably would be quite a few million deaths. Maybe as high as 50-75 million here in America if the Chinese get lucky. Though if we were to launch a retalitory strike with an equal number of weapons.....China might well be screwed.
 
Top