Neutron Bombs

[Whaleboy]

"because they "damage" blood cells, while won't affect, say, vegetation"

You irradiate something with high levels of alpha, beta or gamma radiation, it will be the DNA and cell membranes that receive the most damage. I believe you may be referring to microwave radiation, if so, then yes, microwaves do damage the blood cells...

I think we have all seen the gerbil in the microwave oven

Neutron bombs will effectively invalidate all forms of life within the area, except possibly some radiation-resistant bacteria. The DNA wont be able to be recycled because it has all reformed into various gases and blown away, as Azazel said.

The area may not appear it, but it will be more decimated than a conventional nuke. Not that I approve of one over another, the latter is the lesser of two evils, but not by much.

[Cruddy]

Originally posted by panag


hi ,

only that , pffff , that aint a lot , ..... iraq got more

btw , the estimates are wrong , like mentioned above , they dont even say how many reactors we have , ....

have a nice day

Sounds like a good reason to insist on a UN weapons inspection team.

[Q Classic]

both of them are equally suited to their task, which is killing enemy people who aren't you, and aren't really human.

[Az]

True that. But it will only last for a short while. When the radiation source is out, life can spring back.

[Cruddy]

*** Original point deleted ***

I'm tending to agree with Azazel on this point, with the note that any nuke produces fallout. The radioactive effects kind of outway the localised annihilation of life.

There are no clean nukes. How dirty they are is a matter of simulation which - God forbid - never gets empireacally checked for real.

[Inverse Icarus]

Originally posted by Cruddy


Do you think of your mother, father, brothers and sisters as not really human?

I suggest you modify your post.

no no no. he's stating that your enemies arent seen as human.

they're towel... not human.

[Q Classic]

cruddy...

you do realize in wars that the first instinct of any nation is to dehumanize the enemy: hence we get slurs like slopes, slant-eyes, krauts, japs, and so on and so forth.
the point of such propaganda, naturally, is to dehumanize the enemy, and thus make it easier to hate them and kill them.

naturally, when you no longer see them as human, it's a lot easier to drop nuclear weapons of any sort on them. after all, it's not like they're people just like you and me, they're the Enemy, and thus must perish.

so before you think i'm some sort of monster who thinks his own family isn't human...
use a little logic, try and understand how war fvcks with national psychologies, and think a little, mm?

[Az]

UberKrux... cruising for a bruising, heh?

[Inverse Icarus]

Originally posted by Azazel
UberKrux... cruising for a bruising, heh?

i'm in one of my moods. i have good days and bad.

[Cruddy]

That is a fair and reasonable point UberKruX and I have modified my post.

[Inverse Icarus]

Originally posted by Cruddy
That is a fair and reasonable point UberKruX and I have modified my post.

me? fair? reasonable?

you must have misspelled Q Cubed or something.

[GePap]

I find Israelis boasting to Russians about their nuclear arsenal absurd. Wow, Israel can launch satelites! Thats 1960 tech right there for yah!

Israel doesn't even have missile subs, so even if it did have a significant ICBM force (which it doesn't), in a nuclear duels bt. Russia and Israel, one ends up badly (cause any sort of nuclear duel is bad), the other ends up exterminated, extinguished, utterly and completely gone from the face of the earth, for eternity.

Wow, what a constest!

And as for the neutron bomb: no, tyhe pollution does no go away very quickly. People still miss the point. At the core remains a good, old fahsioned fission bomb, with all the output of a fission bomb. Neutron bombs were in theory battlefield bombs, their usefullnaess based on the notion that the smaller amount of nuclear pollution they would cause made them a weapon which we might actually think of using (after all, it produces even less radiation than Hisoshima sized bombs, and people live in hiroshima today) near populated areas. They arent anti-city weapons, because tpo get neutron bombs usefull against cities, you would ahve to pump up the size of it to a point where at the core you have some sort of Hiroshima sized bombs anyway.

[Az]

I find Israelis boasting to Russians about their nuclear arsenal absurd. Wow, Israel can launch satelites! Thats 1960 tech right there for yah!

Israel doesn't even have missile subs, so even if it did have a significant ICBM force (which it doesn't), in a nuclear duels bt. Russia and Israel, one ends up badly (cause any sort of nuclear duel is bad), the other ends up exterminated, extinguished, utterly and completely gone from the face of the earth, for eternity.

Everyone knows that, GePap. You're taking things WAAAY too seriously.

[GePap]

Nah, the panag-cruddy debate got me going.

[Whaleboy]

The fruits of victory in war, is ash.

People are completely correct when a nation is engaged in a war, it views its enemies as somehow inferior, for example, sub-human etc. They view their enemies government as flawed, the people as naive, or if its a war of "liberation", oppressed by "evil". They view themselves as engaged in some kind of pseudo-holy, righteous, objective campaign to rid the world of evil infadels (sound familiar?).

My point is that those engaged in war with another generally tend to negate objectivity. They force their subjective over another, and objectively, that is unacceptable. In the end, history will always laugh at those who set themselves up as judge, jury and executioner. I cannot think of an example where that is not the case.

I know I keep going on about (pseudo) objectivity, but it is really important, I shall write an article on it soon, and give ya'll the link.

Surely it is better to strive for a common objectivity, in this case, a common humanity, rather than constantly compete, discriminate and persecute. We did it with slavery, we continue to do it with other nations and we continue to do it with anything that doesnt conform to our way of doing things, our way of thinking. This "high watermark" approach to commonality, leads to ethnocentrism in the meantime, and much suffering and needless bloodshed, which, objectively, all wars, no matter the justification at the time, are.