Holy shit, please tell me this is not true.

Re: ""You Don't Need A Weatherman ..... "&am

Nuclear winter has been discovered by some scientist guy to not be too significant. It would take an asteroid or something like that, nukes aren't enough (unless you use hundreds of 50 megaton nukes, in which case you've pretty much sterilized the planet).
Click to expand...
Are there any calculations around which could give a clue how much boom-boom you'd need to cause a nuclear winter?
I've heard everything between firecrackers and x teraton bombs.


4too said:
Glorious rambling.
Click to expand...
I might not always get what he means but dear lord it is great to read. Like poetry, but with LSD and nuclear weapons.

edit: damn tags
 
Aye, atomic cafe has some footage of several of them. Videos of pacific islands being tested on and I think there was even one where they tested its tactical use by detonating and then sending troops in. mmmm good film
 
Re: ""You Don't Need A Weatherman ..... "&am

Suicide Candidate said:
Are there any calculations around which could give a clue how much boom-boom you'd need to cause a nuclear winter?
I've heard everything between firecrackers and x teraton bombs.
Click to expand...

as little as 200 megatons could trigger nuclear winter.
 
it would have to be a spread out detonation. centralized or nearby explosions wouldnt do it. it would have to be spread out or else it wouldnt happen because there isnt enough over a big enough distance to trigger it.
 
dodgerovitch said:
^might be, if they ever get it off the ground lol
Click to expand...


The "megaton" signified blast strength equivalent to a certain mass of TNT IIRC, not the actual mass of the weapon. I'm guessing you got it wrong.


TheWesDude said:
it would have to be a spread out detonation. centralized or nearby explosions wouldnt do it. it would have to be spread out or else it wouldnt happen because there isnt enough over a big enough distance to trigger it.
Click to expand...

You're underestimating the potential of winds here, especially higher up in the atmosphere. When Chernobyl went off, half of Europe got contaminated in a matter of days.
 
The Overseer said:
dodgerovitch said:
^might be, if they ever get it off the ground lol
Click to expand...


The "megaton" signified blast strength equivalent to a certain mass of TNT IIRC, not the actual mass of the weapon. I'm guessing you got it wrong.
Click to expand...

no, i meant given the budget deficits it is unlikely they will be able to put it together. most of them are past the expiration date and could easily misfire.
 
Loxley said:
So please tell me. What is the expiration date on a nuclear bomb?
Click to expand...
Depends on the half-life of the material in the centre. I think they always use plutonium, but I may be wrong.
Pu-238 has a half-life of 87.7 years.
Pu-239 has a half-life of 24,100 years.
Pu-240 has a half-life of 6,560 years.
I don't which isotope they use in nuclear bombs, and I don't know the half-life of the other 12 isotopes, so they could expire within a century, or not.
You can work out the dates yourself.
 
when they talk about the lifespan of a bomb i dont think they are talking about the radioactive element, i am pretty sure they are talking about the electronics and other components of the missle/bomb.
 
So there appeares that there is some people here that has genuine knowledge of how the russians store their bombs. They also have such a intimate knowledge on the construction of ICBMs that they can safly say that these bombs will not get of the launch site, or that they will fail in reaching their destination. I know this is a fallout board, but wow that is amasing. I kneel in the dust at your awsome knowledge.

I guess what i'm trying to say here is LINK or STFU.
 
Earlier we mentioned this policy might be a way of telling the North Koreans to STFU about their bombs... then I read this when checking my mail:

BEIJING - North Korea on Monday agreed to stop building nuclear weapons and allow international inspections in exchange for energy aid, economic cooperation and security assurances, in a first step toward disarmament after two years of six-nation talks.
Click to expand...

Was this a result of the new policies or of the fact that North Korea is poor as shit?

http://www.optonline.net/News/Article/Feeds?CID=type=xml&channel=32&article=15859925
 
If the Koreans gave the bomb a high enough priority, then poverty shouldn't be an issue. Even possessing a single warhead would give them immense political leverege.

It seems to me, that there are three possibilities. The North Koreans are bluffing to try and alleviate the regional heat, the new nuclear doctrines honestly have them scared witless, or they've received a deal under the table in exchange for their compliance.
 
One of the points of the NK nuclear program is to blackmail the world and the countries around them for food an supplies so they can ensure that the people don't rebell. Looks like it is working, my bet is that when that food and aid has crossed the border the program will be started again and the inspectors kicked into the south.
 
I am not so sure about that. What if the North Koreans basically said, "Hey we got the bomb and you better give us lots of stuff or we'll nuke you."

And the rest of the world said, "If you tried it we'd turn you into a radioactive dust heap. Grow up."

As for the recent decisions- I think its more likely that they received a deal under the table and will probably break their word at the earliest opportunity.
 
I'm not really sure why people are bringing Katrina related things into this discussion. Are you trying to use it as proof of ineptitude? Cause it would be a bad example. If anything, it's an example of crying wolf. Out of the last 3 times an evacuation order was issued in New Orleans, nothing happened twice. Those hurricanes missed New Orleans completely. As for Katrina, evacuations were taking place. Only around 75,000 were left in the city after Katrina hit, and of those 75,000, 15,000 were busing evacuated daily after the storm hit land. The problems in New Orleans don't really have anything to do with how effective the US or local governments were. It does have everything to do with the fact that people were refusing to leave.

Oh, and I just reread Loxely's post about how the space based missile defense system is supposed to protect against terrorists and rogue nations. Terrorists and rogue nations do not have the capabilities to LAUNCH against the United States. Such defense systems are designed to protect against missiles that enter into outer space (like ICBMs). Al Qaeda doesn't have an arsenal of ICMBs, I'm afraid.

Also, to address some things that were bothering me about the Chechen issue. There are no terrorists in Chechnya. Political science dictates that there can be no terrorists in a time of war, only terror tactics. The flagrant ethnic cleansing that is taking place in Chechnya sickens me.
 
Graz'zt said:
I wrote: The day USA uses a nuclear weapon will be the last day of human civilization.

I didn't write: The day USA uses a nuclear weapon for the first time will be the last day of human civilization.
Click to expand...

Your grasp of English is lacking, young padawan

"The day the USA uses a nuclear weapon" is almost an indefinite proposition. It states that when the condition "The day the USA uses a nuclear weapon" = 1, then "the last day of human cilization" will run. Ok?

KoC said:
The problems in New Orleans don't really have anything to do with how effective the US or local governments were. It does have everything to do with the fact that people were refusing to leave.
Click to expand...

You do realise the evacuation order was given way too late?

You do realise those 75.000 left for the most part had no means of evacuation, as the only way to leave was with a car as a no buses were leaving?

You do realise this does not excuse the amount of time it took to come to the rescue? Or the small scale of the rescue?

KoC said:
There are no terrorists in Chechnya. Political science dictates that there can be no terrorists in a time of war, only terror tactics.
Click to expand...

Semantics. Whether you call them freedom fighters that use terror tactics or terrorists is IRRELEVANT.

Though Russia is not at war with Chechnya, as Chechnya is not a country

Does this also means there are no terrorists in Afghanistan or Iraq either?

KoC said:
The flagrant ethnic cleansing that is taking place in Chechnya sickens me.
Click to expand...

Yuh-huh.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top