| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| camelot |
Posted - 03/10/2007 : 01:02:00
I personally do not want every man woman and child to have nuclear weapons complete with a delivery system. Its human nature to strike out in anger every so often if history (and police records) is any indication. So the question is: How do we stop the proliferation of nukes when it is SO EASY to make them??? I work with scientists who, for the most part, work on profit making creations for the company I work for…and to a man (actually an equal amount of women) they believe that any college post graduate engineering student could design a working bomb in no time at all. Toothpaste back into the tube comes to mind…
I was originally going to post this in the Iran thread, but Iran is just the tip of the iceberg so to speak. Any “country” that tries to use nukes will mostly likely be vaporized, but what of a non national threat….an attack that cannot be linked to a specific country? The USA responded to the 911 attacks by attacking Afganistan, and later Iraq.... |
| 10 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Miriam Binder |
Posted - 04/10/2007 : 14:07:47
quote:
Originally posted by Norbert
strangely enough those that oppose the localised fear mongering are often in favour of the International version !
I suppose the primary difference is that one is aimed at specific target groups and the other relates to general concepts. |
| Norbert |
Posted - 04/10/2007 : 14:01:31
It would appear that the 'Easy to Make Non-Working H Bombs' are to be rejected by N Korea in exchange for aid !
The constant fear mongering about 'WMD' and 'Nuclear Rogue States' is not very different to the fear and hatred strategies perpetrated by the far right against target communities, strangely enough those that oppose the localised fear mongering are often in favour of the International version ! |
| Daveb |
Posted - 03/10/2007 : 19:43:18
I think very low frequency sound at high power has the desired effect.
Also if you can find the resonant frequency of something it will takes on almost self sustaining energy and will shake itself to pieces.
This is why marching soldiers break step when crossing a bridge. |
| nightowl |
Posted - 03/10/2007 : 19:36:28
Who is going to produce the weapon that replaces nuclear bombs as the ultimate weapon?
What will it be I wonder, as sure as man has replaced the spear for the gun some new horrific weapon will be developed have no doubt,.
The future could be even more terrifying than we can imagine, A Cellular disrupter that targets only humans but leaves everything else intact? |
| Daveb |
Posted - 03/10/2007 : 19:29:06
There may a proliferation treaty that prevents sale of complete weapons and technology to countries that do not already have it.
There are always people who will find a black market way. |
| Vince Meegan |
Posted - 03/10/2007 : 18:24:02
Seems a flippant point to make, but when we are looking for a car, we don't start thinking about designing it and buying in ten thousand components and then putting it all together.
Why bother making one, - or ten- when you can simply go off and buy them? There are plenty of people around the world already making them. The ones they make in China, Pakistan and India are probably cheap enough.
Money can buy anything. Even entire governments and elections. It's merely a question of how much. It would still be cheaper than building your own car.
|
| Norbert |
Posted - 03/10/2007 : 13:49:16
It doesn't really matter much what you or any other individual wants in this respect. Thermonuclear weapons may be 'Relatively Easy' to manufacture, the processes are by no means trivial! acquistion of materials is neither easy nor inexpensive in absolute terms either.
Delivery systems have lead times of decades and multi billion dollar budgets.The results of of all the aforementioned work and cost can result in miserable failure for the sponsors of all the work too.
I believe that the last underground test carried out by N Korea was reported as a virtual failure, the thermonuclear detonation yield was very poor and the device itself was literally a test rig with massive support infrastructure and was therefore nothing like a practical weapon. |
| Daveb |
Posted - 03/10/2007 : 08:17:29
You have one world president.
Trouble is that will not happen unless there is a world war.
After which there may not be much of a world to preside over! |
| long time no see |
Posted - 03/10/2007 : 06:06:33
Yes Camelot
The Late & Great
George Harrison had a good song about it back in 1980
from that song:
"The Armament Consortium
They're selling us Plutonium
Now you can make your own H-Bomb
Right in the Kitchen with your mom."
© 1980/2004 George Harrison/Dark Horse
Track 'Save The World.' |
| Miriam Binder |
Posted - 03/10/2007 : 04:14:11
I don't think we actually can stop anyone who is determined enough. We can try of course and to some extent we already are trying - it is my understanding from having read it somewhere (and I cannot for the life of me now remember where) that there are a few people whose sole purpose in life - job-wise - is to stop the various specific elements necessary for the manufacture of a nuclear bomb (of whatever size) falling into unauthorised hands (by which they may mean countries their paymasters do not approve of but I think would also cover and undesirable individuals/groups). Ultimately though and scary as the thought might be, it is a bit of a Pandora's box really isn't it. |
