1km is when it detonates on impact just above the ground. Or a hollywood backpack dirty bomb scenario.
You would ofcourse need to detonate it at 3000m altitude more or less depending on the wind and use liquid gas that is heavier than air(ie. Co2) to disperse heu dust to a large area expanding and descending to the ground. In that case the radiation footprint would have a much larger radius. I am sure there are prototypes that Iran has and it is much different than the classic dirty bomb example that is detonated on the ground.
No, it is when it detonates in the air. If it detonates on the ground, it will be much less effective than that. Only a few streets or blocks at most.
Where to hit is another issue. Hitting farmlands would cripple any form of sustainable living there for a long time. Hitting population centers like tel aviv would make the place long term very hazardous to live. There would be a lot of cancer cases and birth defects if people would opt to live on those areas. Which is very deterrent even if the long term effects take 10 years. The effects will be there
It doesn't change what I said though. At the best case scenario, you'll poison tens of thousands of people with high doses of radiation and make the place inhabitable for years. In return, you'll get millions of Iranians dead, millions of Iranians injured with third-degree burns and radiation poisoning, and millions homeless. The entire Iranian healthcare system will collapse, food reserves will be destroyed, nothing will remain of the Iranian civilization for decades. Not in anyway comparable.
I mentioned this option after isreal or usa uses their nukes so I think it should be pretty understandable. That is having a deterrent option AFTER millions of your people are tergeted by potential usa-isreal nukes. Not before as an initiater but as an option of deterrence. So no nukes will be used on you. I dont know why you keep misunderstanding this.
Yes, I understood and even in that case, it's still a bad plan because that's not how nuclear war plays out.
The US won't just nuke all Iranian cities at once. It will strike one or two targets with tactical nukes, like the Pickaxe Mountain, then move up the escalation ladder slowly to always keep some options for the case Iran decides to escalate. They will keep their options open for retaliation and deterrence.
There's no way that dirty bombs are in any way deterrent against strategic nukes. Dirty bombs are even less effective than chemical bombs.
he is not saying Iran should initiate a nuclear exchange with Israel. he is saying it's a back up plan for Iran to have some form of credible deterrent against a nuclear strike short of a functional nuclear warhead.
Already answered. That's not how nuclear war plays out. It's not a backup and in no shape or form it's a form of "credible deterrence" against strategic nukes that can destroy multiple cities like Tehran, Karaj and Pardis at once.
