Which country with nuclear weapons frightens you the most?

[Aro]

Originally posted by Azazel
I think they'd be rather stupid,considering the bomb blast would kill lots of palestinians as well... on second thought, that reminds me that they don't care.
......................

Exactly.

The worst thing about the Terror is this. They don't care.

[Kuciwalker]

Sort of like when I play civ...

[Az]

I've just noticed the cold-heartness of one of my previous posts.

[Aro]

Originally posted by GePap
Hmm, tough one?

Lets see: Brazil? Nah, they wpuld just have a big party around it?

Argentina? Arrogant bastards would think their nuke is too good to be used on lower lifeforms

Japan: would waste it on useless anti-giant monster bit

Eritrea: might use it on etthiopia (and vice versa), sadly, it wouldn;t change much.

Solomon Islands: their raft delivery system not very dangerous...

Turkeminstan? Local dictators would simply rename it the Trukenbashibomb and have a mural of him and it painted.


Of those that don;t yet have them, I think...well, no one really. I go with India and Pak.

Specially that one about Argentina... Just kidding, my Argentinian friends...

[Odd]

People have a wrong idea about neutron bombs. That stuff about killing people and leaving buidings intact is crap, in a nuclear war civilian buidings are no more important than civilian people. Although small, it's still a nuclear blast, and it can indeed damage civilian buidings. As far as I know they were developed as a method to kill the soldiers inside the tanks, that aren't much affected by the heat and blastwave of the conventional nuke. A tank's armor is fairly resistant to heat and pressure damage, but can be penetrated by neutron particles. So it has more of a combat role than the regular nukes.

Although it's tempting to blame the USA for not banning nukes I think it's not likely that they'll use it, simply because they don't have to. I can't think of a scenario that they'll be forced to use nukes other than a nuclear attack by Russia (the world would be already screwed by then). Ok, maybe if France declares war on the USA they'll nuke them just for fun, but the whole idea is just too absurd.

I strongly disagree that NK would nuke someone because it has nothing to lose. NK is Kim, and Kim has a much better life than Saddam has these days. I don't know to which extent the man is crazy (the way he acts towards the usa sound as wise as to kick a sleeping angry dog), but although there are plenty of rational reasons for him to have nukes, there's no rational reason to use one (well, that applies to any country, doesn't it?).

If a terrorist nuclear blast in Israel would kill a lot of palestinians, a nuclear blast in any of Israel's enemies could bring radiation to Israel as well. With the difference that in deep trouble Israel can just pass the coordinates to the USA to dig a hole with conv. weapons. Terrorists can't do that. And don´t forget that all terrorist attacks blows away at least one arab.

So what frigtens me the most is the fact that nuclear technology is 60 years old, and it's each day more accesible to madmans. I dunno how hard will be to produce a nuke withing another 60 years.

[Ted Striker]

USA! USA! USA!

Push the button and light up the sky!!!!

The roof is on fire let this muthf'er burn!!!!!!!!!!!!















5/10

Deducted points for unoriginality but bonus points for effectiveness.

[TCO]

launch Brittney!

[Kuciwalker]

...

[raghar]

Originally posted by Azazel
I have a question:

what do you think of Neutron Bombs? are they less or more moral that regular nukes?

You could listen a lot of fairy tales about it. Some even from people that worked in radiologic research.

A good nuke has around 40 km in complete killing radius. and another 40 with 50% fatalities, IIRC. this would kill tens of thousands of Arabs in Jaffa and Lud, and will kill lots of Palestinians as well.

What about 5 km? Ground blast and I don't think they would have tritium bomb w/ levitating core.
Mike had fine heat at 40 nm isn't it. Uncluckily that US watchers survived well. No burned up eyebrows
I would see biger problems with US nuclear bombs than w/ profilitation of Russia's bombs.
And don't forget Izrael's aprox 300 ones. What if someone would... BTW I . Rabbin wasn't shoot down with Izrael made weapon? Or by person or something It's a long time.

[Ted Striker]

Originally posted by GP
launch Brittney!

Sorry Navy I missed this!

USA!

[chequita guevara]

Oops, you did it again.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Ted Striker


Sorry Navy I missed this!

USA!

I still cannot understand why people post this picture to prove their patriotism. The pic will turn any sane lifeform into an America-hater

[Ted Striker]

Mission accomplished!

[Kontiki]

Originally posted by Azazel

Actually, nuking some city in the center of Israel, like Tel Aviv, would kill very few Arabs at all. Nukes are not that powerful people, don't exagerate their power.

A good nuke has around 40 km in complete killing radius. and another 40 with 50% fatalities, IIRC. this would kill tens of thousands of Arabs in Jaffa and Lud, and will kill lots of Palestinians as well.

Grossly exagerating those blast radius figures. To get that kind of damage, you'd need around a 50 megaton bomb. Most MIRVed (ie:what you'd find on an ICBM)warheads have yields in the hundreds of kilotons range, far less than one megaton.

To get an idea, check out this site: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/bomb/sf.../blastmap.html

[DRoseDARs]

I just took their "Panic Test". My score = 133.5

With a score like that one has to wonder one of two things:

Am I calm and collected in an emergency to have that kind of score...

...Or am I already dead at that point?