Somthing to think about

[Matrixwolf]

Was cruising the net the other day and saw this, I'm sure alot of people have seen this before but it really makes you think.

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/atomicbomb.html





Now once you watch that think about this, what we have today is in some cases is 100 times greater than that, Now if you were a leader of a country who just got kicked in the nuts by some terrorists what would you do if you thought someone had somthing like that? Now I'm neither Rep nor a Dem but it does make me think.





PS. Hey DS this is me posting, see, post ha ha.

[Redwolf_Claw]

Question... why do we keep nuclear testing the same kind of bomb over and over again? Don't you think they would've figured it out by now that they make a big fuckin boom? Personally I do not think any country should have atomic bombs. Also, what is the point of having a million nuclear warheads when about 300 can wipe out all life on earth? That is just retarded.

[Urufu]

What gets my billy goat gruff is how they can actually record the cars, buildings, trees, etc getting wiped out without the camera itself being destroyed :confused:

[Reformer56]

You know whats really frightening about this, the last stats I read the U.S. has the weapon power to destroy and decimate the world TWENTY THREE TIMES over!! 23 Thats huge!!! Followed closely behind by Russia and at last check they had 15 give or take 3 I believe. Putin is pretty mad that we manipulated the Ukranian elections our way. Because he lost a huge Uranium stock that would have powered a new program. Rumor is the old KGB officier, Putin, is still going to try and complete the program that is rumored to be able to bipass the patriot missle defense grid.

[Urufu]

Rumor is the old KGB officier, Putin, is still going to try and complete the program that is rumored to be able to bipass the patriot missle defense grid.


I actually heard about that on the news a few months ago. It's pretty much gets my freak on. I don't know why we can't just get along with one another.

[Reformer56]

Old hostilites carry over since the Cold War you know...Russia doesn't exactly have warm and fuzzy feelings ever since Reagan's interference in their business. We have been manipulating elections that they needed. And NATO was originally created to be an alliance against the Soviet Union so the fact that NATO is still even in existance is probably viewed as hostile to the Russians. And let's not forget that capitalism and communisim don't mix all that well...

[Ves]

Following the completion of the Manhattan Project, the project leader, Robert Oppenheimer, quoted from Hindu scripture:-
"I am become death, the destroyer of worlds".
Very appropriate.

As the original post said, the film does bring it home (if such needs bringing home) how scary nuclear weapons are. But sadly until such time as someone works out how to detect and destroy them, they're here to stay. It's kinda like the argument against gun control that says if you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns.
Many will tell you that the a-bomb finished the second world war in the Pacific, and it did. But at a huge cost.

the program that is rumored to be able to bipass the patriot missle defense grid.
Patriot isn't a missile defence system, it's designed to shoot down planes. When Bush was giving it that speech about how successful the system had been in Israel, stating an almost 100% success rate at shooting down SCUD missiles, he was greatly exaggerating.
Besides a SAM based system would never be able to shoot down an airburst ICBM nuclear attack as far as I know.

[blueeyes]

The sad thing is that, despite the huge cost of the method used to end the second World War in the Pacific, there's still a good deal of evidence that it was the most cost-effective way in terms of lives.

As to surface-based systems designed to shoot down ICMBs, it's actually possible, just not feasible. The United States is actually experimenting with what it effectively one missle tied on top of the other, and that's gotten to the point where it would be capable of actually shooting down a reasonably sized missle on the edge of the Earth's atmosphere or even beyond.

The primary issue is that when you're targetting at something that far away moving that fast, it doesn't take much for problems to develop. Generally the success rate tends to go anywhere from 1/2 in great test conditions, to 1/15 in shitty ones. I don't think anyone really likes those odds, particularly when they don't include the chance of 'dummy' missles or image-scrambling tools.

[Reformer56]

Patriot isn't a missile defence system, it's designed to shoot down planes. When Bush was giving it that speech about how successful the system had been in Israel, stating an almost 100% success rate at shooting down SCUD missiles, he was greatly exaggerating.


There are two Patriot Defense systems one of which is a defense grid and the other is an actual installement. The Patriot installment is a defense system made to defend attacking warheads. Its hold point is so that it can shoot down warheads and be able to tell which are drones and which are the actual warheads. And yeah I think we all know that theres no way it had that high of a success rate in Israel. But it did shoot down some SCUD missles. When I last heard, their newest defense grid could only take out 95% of the warheads headed towards the U.S. that last 5% could easily take us out so now comes the question do we spend trillions of dollars in research or do we go back to the M.A.D. treaty with everyone?

[Darth Cluich]

Okay, it's late, and I'm tired. You're all somewhat wrong and somewhat right on the missile-defense thing. I'll post a full explanation of what the current system can and cannot do in the next day or so, once I've gotten some much needed sleep.

[Ves]

But it did shoot down some SCUD missles.
In a recent BBC documentary on the Gulf war, both Colin Powell and Shwarzkopf(sp?) were interviewed and admitted that Patriot actually only managed to shoot down 1 SCUD, the rest was them being economical with the truth to keep the Israelis out of the conflict. They also admitted that cruise missiles couldn't navigate over Iraq so they had to shoot them over Iran first to get the bearings, then direct them at Baghdad. I hope they ironed out that little wrinkle before we all went back for round 2 in 2003.
As for the rest of the stuff about Patriot, it'll be interesting to see what Cluich says as he actually knows about this stuff in my experience and I'm simply going on memory of a documentary (it was Powell that said that Patriot was an anti-aircraft system not an anti-missile system btw).

[Reformer56]

I have no doubt of that, but there is a much more recent actual phsyical Patriot Missle/Warhead defense system. I believe I might have actually seen that documentary on BBC I get it on satellite. But I'm going from memory myself. So I too am eager to see Cluich's post.

[Firesong]

Trinity and Beyond (http://www.vce.com/trinity.html)
if any of you can DL movies...look this one up and watch it...it's fuckin SCARY!

[Darth Cluich]

In the interests of saving me a lot of time, here's a link to a good description of the Patriot missile system: CLICK HERE. (http://www.army-technology.com/projects/patriot/) This is the system that's fielded now. There's a newer version in development, called the Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3), for the Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS) being developed by the US, Germany, and Italy. A description of the MEADS can be found HERE. (http://www.army-technology.com/projects/meads/)