It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
AP describes the Blu-82, nicknamed "Big Blue," as being "as large as a Volkswagen beetle, but heavier." Digging for the less charming details, one finds that the bomb got its other name, "Daisy Cutter," because of the shape of the crater it leaves -- and that it has the ability to clear a 3-mile-long path. Dropped from huge transport aircraft, "Big Blue" releases a cloud of inflammable ammonium nitrate, aluminum dust, and polystyrene slurry which is then ignited by a detonator. The result is a firestorm that incinerates an area the size of five football fields, consumes oxygen, and creates a shock-wave and vacuum pressure that destroys the internal organs of anyone within range.
44. Number of U.S. nuclear bombs lost in accidents and never recovered: 11
Originally posted by Awory
Because it would mostly likely lose your bid for re-election?
If all 50 states bannded then, and big if, you would still have the weapons stored on federal property in their silos, bases, etc.
Originally posted by sdcigarpig
The main reason why a state can not ban nuclear weapons, is cause you end up with 2 problems.
1) If a State did that, then how could they verify anything on a military instillation? All Military Instillitations are considered federal property and they have the authroization to use deadly force. Under those guidelines, they military can keep any kind of weapon on any military instillation at any time and the state has nothing that it can do with such.
2) Where do you propose to keep all of the weapons? Someone has to be willing to hold them in their state and then how could you ensure the absolute security of such? With all of the nuclear weapons in the US arsenal spred out, it is easier for the different branches of the military to keep control over such, as each has protocals that are required for such.
Originally posted by Doc Velocity
The USA can't simply wish away nuclear weapons — that genie is OUT of the bottle, and there's always going to be a handful of nations out there who are nuclear-capable.
If we ban nuclear weapons, disarm our nuclear missile subs, and eliminate our entire nuclear stockpile, that doesn't mean dick, particularly with China and India and North Korea and Pakistan and Israel and Russia still hoarding those weapons.
And, frankly, you cannot trust ANY of those nations to completely disarm.
For the USA to unilaterally disarm and eliminate its nuclear capability is more than merely stupid, it's suicidal.
— Doc Velocity
Originally posted by DJW001
Many communities have banned nuclear weapons, material and research. No state would ban nuclear activities because they would lose their military bases and the income they generate.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union,
establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common
defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to
ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the
United States of America.
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and
Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general
Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be
uniform throughout the United States;
Which continues to say:
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
NARRATOR: But is the notion of a world without nuclear weapons purely hypothetical? Some people are convinced that the nuclear genie is out of the bottle and can't be put back in. Noam Chomsky, however, dismisses this as mindless rhetoric.
Dr. CHOMSKY: The genie out of the bottle doesn't mean anything. The doomsday machine genie is out of the bottle, too.
[Film Clip from "Dr. Strangelove" (Columbia Pictures)]
Dr. CHOMSKY: Doomsday machines are possible. Does that mean we have to have a doomsday machine? I mean, these are just mind-less claims. Just the fact that it's possible to do something wildly destructive doesn't mean you must have it available.