Mass destruction weapons in Iraq

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Simon666

Iraq is not that big. If you would use everything you had it would be overkill. A strikeback against strategic targets or a couple of cities would even then release much less radio-active material than in the Chernobyl blast. Not that that was harmless either, but did you notice anything? I didn't.

Check the above about overkill and such. A probable nuclear counter attack would consist probably of tens or hundreds of kilos, not tons. The smallest amount of plutonium needed for an atom bomb is classified though estimated at around 8 kilo. The amount of radio-active material is also coming from other stuff than plutonium, such as materials around the bomb holding it together, but their half lifes are shorter. Complex stuff, but nevertheless, it would not be worse than Chernobyl. And people are living pretty much "normal" again in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Cancers are much higher ofcourse.

I did hear that too and I think it is true. But what you said about those landing on Israel is not true. And even if it is true (probable), than we're back at point one: were these weapons really destroyed and if not, can they still cause harm so that action would be necessary?

---

I hope we never reach the day where we have to check just how much radiation was released from a nuclear warhead. Alot of people forget that the firebombing of tokyo killed more than both atomic bombs combined. But back in that day, it was ok to bomb civilian targets and yes the nazi's were the first to bomb civilian targets if we are talking WWII, doesn't make it right, nor do I think the allies would have hesitated to bomb civilian targets first. I was a mind set back then, the worlds thinking has changed for the better since.

Actually, they were around 15 and 22 kiloton devices, respectively. But I am not defending Simon666's line of reasoning here (in fact I think with 200,000+ immediate deaths, the thinking goes the other way)...

Quote:

---

Originally posted by galathaea
Actually, they were around 15 and 22 kiloton devices, respectively. But I am not defending Simon666's line of reasoning here (in fact I think with 200,000+ immediate deaths, the thinking goes the other way)...

---

Yes those numbers are right, mine are wrong... I was thinking of something else at the time I typed it, sorry. But there were fewer than that many immediate deaths, although the exact number is a petty detail.

Yes and I think our newest tac nuke is 100x the power of the aforementioned atomic explosions. 100 times, think about that, and that's just what we classify as a tactical nuke. I'm sure some of you have at least watched documentaries on hiroshima and nagasaki lets not try and put anyone through that again. I still have to go back to strangelove for some reason...is this some wierd fetish I have, I don't know ;) Would Freud look at me and just say remarkable (think little rascals)....

Quote:

---

We'll meet again, don't know where, don't know when
But I know we'll meet again, some sunny day
Keep smiling through, just like you always do
Till the blue skies drive the dark clouds far away
So will you please say hello to the folks that I know
Tell them I won't be long
They'll be happy to know, that as you saw me go
I was singing this song...

---

And for those that love pink.

Quote:

---

Does anybody here remember Vera Lynn?
Remember how she said,
That we would meet again,
Some sunny day.
Vera!
Vera!
What has become of you?
Does anybody else in here feel the way I do?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by solarflare
whoa whoa whoa there you go again Simon!! Check the facts. Maybe you have some baby nukes like that, but I certainly don't. The largest unclassified nukes the US possesses are hundreds of megatons. Besides, the effects of radiation from the two nukes off in Japan are still being studied.

---

I'd like to see a missile able to carry a megaton of fissil material!!!!!!!!!!!!! It would allow us to send the ISS in space in one shot. How good!

Megaton is not a unit of weigth here! It's the equivalent dynamite (I think) you need for an explosion of same intensity. I don't have a clue how much fissil material is required for that, be kilo is probably a better unit for that.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Mick_2002
Do not trust what is being reported to you is my motto :) :) :) Though I will make the occasional sarcastic comment. Please don't misconstrue that I actually believe any of the bunk (and it is bunk right now) that is being spewed from the media. I believe things that make sense but only truely believe them when I can see the evidence. I am not paranoid everyone is after me :)

---

Since the beginning, every thing that goes with your point of view makes sense, and everything that doesn't does not make sense. It seems that everything you don't like MUST be propaganda.

Yes, SH having some WMD does make sense. And I even agree with that. It makes sense, but it doesn't mean he has them. If he doesn't have them, it probably be because he didn't manage to be able to create it, or because he decided to spend his money otherwise (even if probably not wisely), ... but he may still have no WMD, even if it seems more likely that he have some (and definitely NOT because of the evidences the US has shown).

But the US targetting anything else than very highly military objectives doesn't (you never gave to Simon a straight answer about that missile lost in or near Iran). Having civilian people living in government building is SO incredible that it must be propaganda as well, ...

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Elrond


I'd like to see a missile able to carry a megaton of fissil material!!!!!!!!!!!!! It would allow us to send the ISS in space in one shot. How good!

Megaton is not a unit of weigth here! It's the equivalent dynamite (I think) you need for an explosion of same intensity. I don't have a clue how much fissil material is required for that, be kilo is probably a better unit for that.

---

You are correct. the original intention was to equate it with tons of trinitrotoluene.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by solarflare
Are you saying that if a nation launched a nuclear weapon it wouldn't be a big deal?

---

What do you mean with not a big deal? Politically, it would be one big mess, people around the world would be furious on the countries doing these things. But technically, it would not be a big deal for the world, yes, only for the countries involved and some of the neighbouring countries where there is fallout. But some parts of Ukrain and large parts of Belarus (where dimm_coder is living) that received doses from Chernobyl that would make rehousing recommended are just continued to be inhabited. And so are Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Death toll would be huge, there would be a large number of wounded for a pretty long time, cancers and other diseases would be much higher during a very long time, but they probably could remain to be inhabited.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by solarflare
Okay, so let's just find a cure for cancer and then we can nuke whomever we want.

---

There is still the political thingy and some conventions not to cause harm to civilians in war, which dropping nukes on cities would do unquestionably.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Mick_2002
Yes and I think our newest tac nuke is 100x the power of the aforementioned atomic explosions. 100 times, think about that, and that's just what we classify as a tactical nuke. I'm sure some of you have at least watched documentaries on hiroshima and nagasaki lets not try and put anyone through that again. I still have to go back to strangelove for some reason...is this some wierd fetish I have, I don't know Would Freud look at me and just say remarkable (think little rascals)....

---

What do you mean with yes? What and who are you reacting to? To the fact that these would cause much more radio-activety? Actually, it is not that simple. I read once the Russians planned to test a 100 Megaton bomb (I think the heaviest tested is around 50 Megaton, correct me if I'm wrong), which was estimated to cause less radio-activity problems.

In order to be maximum effective, an atom bomb should be detonated at a certain height, just as an ordinary grenade is more dangerous when it explodes a little above ground. For a 100 Megaton bomb this would mean the radio-activity is spread over a much larger area. Considering that the amount of radio-activity does not increase linearly with the strength of the bomb, it would mean less radio-activity per unit of surface. There is also the fact that then large amounts of radio-activity would rise up high into the stratosphere. This air in this layer of our atmosphere contains very little turbulence - and thus mixture -unlike the troposphere (where we live in) and moves pretty much horizontally. This ensures that particles such as from volcanoes can stay for several years over there. Radio-active vapor from this bomb (there would be no radio-active particles due to the necessary height of a 100 Mton blast) would stay in for thousands of years and be gradually released spread over the maximum available area, the entire earth, probably at levels below natural radiation.

A 100 megaton bomb would be much cleaner per amount of explosive power because nearly all energy would come from fusion and not fission, unlike other, smaller A- and H-bombs. For more info on the Tsar Bomba, go here and here. They claim however that the effect of this bomb at full yield on global fallout would have been tremendous. It would have increased the world's total fission fallout since the invention of the atomic bomb by 25%. For more info on testing a 50 Megaton version of it, go here. Militarily, it is rather useless as too big and dropping multiple smaller bombs it much more effective to destroy an area. Same probably goes for conventional munitions of more than one ton. The non linearity of the increase in destruction is becoming more clear then, as bombs destroy pretty much a volume ~r³ instead of an area ~r². So basically, an 8 times heavier bomb will destroy only a 4 times bigger area. (4 = pow(8,3/2))

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Elrond


Since the beginning, every thing that goes with your point of view makes sense, and everything that doesn't does not make sense. It seems that everything you don't like MUST be propaganda.

Yes, SH having some WMD does make sense. And I even agree with that. It makes sense, but it doesn't mean he has them. If he doesn't have them, it probably be because he didn't manage to be able to create it, or because he decided to spend his money otherwise (even if probably not wisely), ... but he may still have no WMD, even if it seems more likely that he have some (and definitely NOT because of the evidences the US has shown).

But the US targetting anything else than very highly military objectives doesn't (you never gave to Simon a straight answer about that missile lost in or near Iran). Having civilian people living in government building is SO incredible that it must be propaganda as well, ...

---

Ohh simon had a question :) Where did I state that we can hit a target 100% of the time? Missles can and do go off target, did you expect us to be perfect. I admit, at least it's better than what is being fired towards Kuwait, but it is still not without error. Asking the question about civilians living near goverment buildings is pretty much ridiculous...nobody lives near goverement buildings...what are you thinking? I mean DC is just full of wide open space where the civilians are seperated from the goverment offices.

PS: I'm not the one buying into the propaganda :)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Elrond
Megaton is not a unit of weigth here! It's the equivalent dynamite (I think) you need for an explosion of same intensity. I don't have a clue how much fissil material is required for that, be kilo is probably a better unit for that.

---

It is actually not that much. I think a simple Trident missile has an explosive power in the Megaton range. It is probably not possible to have a missile that carries that much fissile material in case of an A-bomb, but for an H-bomb it is no problem whatsoever. There is also fusable (or what is the opposite of fissile) material in an H-bomb, and hydrogen fusion is much more explosive per amount of weight than plutonium (or uranium) fission.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Mick_2002
Ohh simon had a question :) Where did I state that we can hit a target 100% of the time? Missles can and do go off target, did you expect us to be perfect. I admit, at least it's better than what is being fired towards Kuwait, but it is still not without error. Asking the question about civilians living near goverment buildings is pretty much ridiculous...nobody lives near goverement buildings...what are you thinking? I mean DC is just full of wide open space where the civilians are seperated from the goverment offices.

---

Ok, are you evading the question again? I don't see why DC having no civilian implies it does not make sense there are civilians in and near Iraq's governement building! Or do you think all countries in the world are like the US?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Mick_2002
Ohh simon had a question :) Where did I state that we can hit a target 100% of the time? Missles can and do go off target, did you expect us to be perfect. I admit, at least it's better than what is being fired towards Kuwait, but it is still not without error.

---

Then stop ridiculising it is impossible the US set a couple of oil wells on fire due to misses if you're saying it yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Mick_2002
Asking the question about civilians living near goverment buildings is pretty much ridiculous...nobody lives near goverement buildings...what are you thinking? I mean DC is just full of wide open space where the civilians are seperated from the goverment offices.

---

So why use cluster bombs in Basra? Do you know what cluster bombs are? Would you like you sun or daughter playing with these colored toys coming back home with an arm or a leg ripped off, if coming back at all because their head is blasted off? Would you like to go to work driving through a minefield of unexploded submunitions?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Mick_2002
PS: I'm not the one buying into the propaganda

---

I put this line in my translator from English to Simonish and pressed the button for Simonish to English and the following line appeared:

I'm not buying Iraqi propaganda but I'm buying the US propaganda because it makes me feel good and because then I don't have to think for myself.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Elrond


Ok, are you evading the question again? I don't see why DC having no civilian implies it does not make sense there are civilians in and near Iraq's governement building! Or do you think all countries in the world are like the US?

---

No, I'm sorry, it didn't make sense to you :) We have plenty of civilians around goverment buildings. My point was you are stating the obvious. Do you need to state the obvious? Please state the obvious one more time.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Mick_2002
PS: I'm not the one buying into the propaganda :)

---

I didn't said you where. But listenning to you, EVERYTHING that does not support your point of view is propaganda. That's not really open minded and can't be right.

So may be you are, finally! :)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Simon666

Then stop ridiculising it is impossible the US set a couple of oil wells on fire due to misses if you're saying it yourself.

---

Ok kids, here we go, we have a couple of thousand square miles, Ok now listen up, now listen back there johnny, we are going to miss, here me, we are going to miss, and in that couple of thousand sqaure miles, we are just going to happen to hit an oil well. You kids listen up back there!!! now back to the oil well, yes it is strategic....yawn...flip...back to the enquierer...this just in, Micheals nose is fake..

Quote:

---

So why use cluster bombs in Basra? Do you know what cluster bombs are? Would you like you sun or daughter playing with these colored toys coming back home with an arm or a leg ripped off, if coming back at all because their head is blasted off? Would you like to go to work driving through a minefield of unexploded submunitions?

---

Yep I know what a cluster bomb is, do you? Lets see, hmm media, ohh cluster bomb, I'm a reporter, I know what that is. Do you know what it is? Do you know why it wouldn't be used in a city? Why not just cluster f it all?

Quote:

---

I put this line in my translator from English to Simonish and pressed the button for Simonish to English and the following line appeared:

I'm not buying Iraqi propaganda but I'm buying the US propaganda because it makes me feel good and because then I don't have to think for myself.

---

I know, it's evident :)