It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by doctorfungi
What would you rather... 10,000 nukes that are old and unstable which may cause defunctioning or health risks - or 10,000 safer, newer, more stable nukes.
Unfortunatley, 0 nukes is no longer an option
Originally posted by fritz
1. Do nuclear weapons have shelf lives?
Originally posted by fritz
2. Do they have a 'use by' date?
Originally posted by fritz
3. If you have old stock and you use them, do they not go BANG and kill thousands of people and irradiate the land for 50 to 100 years or so?
Originally posted by fritz
You don't need tens of thousands of nuclear weapons to have a deterrent. You need smaller warheads on low cost long range cruise missiles.
Originally posted by fritz
The vast amounts of money spent by so-called civilized nations on improving weapons of mass destruction is both immoral and obscene, especially when so many of our own people are well below the poverty line!
Originally posted by Low Orbit
They are working on them in the Eastbay at Lawrence Livermore Labs. I heard they are working on dial-a-nuke warheads at LLL in which a nuclear bomb that has already been dropped from an aircraft can be programmed to blow up anything from a city block to a couple square miles, all with 1 bomb.
Too bad they aren't working on improving nuclear power like they are working on nuclear warheads.
Originally posted by Annachie
Originally posted by Low Orbit
They are working on them in the Eastbay at Lawrence Livermore Labs. I heard they are working on dial-a-nuke warheads at LLL in which a nuclear bomb that has already been dropped from an aircraft can be programmed to blow up anything from a city block to a couple square miles, all with 1 bomb.
Too bad they aren't working on improving nuclear power like they are working on nuclear warheads.
Actually they have made quite afew advances in the nuclear power field. en.wikipedia.org...
The idea of a 0-nuke world is probably a definate impossability going on the current political climates. But the idea of M.A.D. (Mutually. Assured. Destruction.) being a deterrant is no longer an option either... The idea of building nukes that are nothing more then city-busters is not really a deterrant for a smaller country that has nothing to lose or for a group that has no country. The Dial-a-yield is under developement in conventional and the idea of them in a nuke will be rather impressive in a morbid sort of way to see if it can be pulled off.
[edit on 6-11-2006 by Annachie]