The point on Israel or us? in Iraq is that the good guys lose by being good guys. FDR had the luxury of complete censorship as we did our part in the death of 50 million people or so to get rid of Hitler and Tojo
That's why I am now anti war because we will do what we did in Iraq. Kick their ass in 15 minutes then give it all back over the next years. Israel has the same issues. But to think Hamas can kick anyone's ass is retarded. And it shows your bias
Chinterestingly enough, in spite of Little Man/Fat Boy, Tokyo, Dresden, et al, The US only accounted for a relatively small fraction of the 50 to 75 million killed in WWII. That body count was almost entirely Japanese killing Chinese, Soviets killing Germans (and whoever else Stalin wanted shot), and Germans killing everyone east of the Molotov - Ribbentrop line. Hell, RAF bomber command actually killed more kraut civilians than the USAAF did.
Pretty sure the Bombing of Tokyo had about the same number of deaths as Little Man/Fat Boy. Today's nukes are literally 1000x more powerful, so results would be a little different now.
Correct, but not so much my point here. Just random fun facting that most the death and destruction of WWII was not in fact inflicted by America in spite our overwhelming industrial might. The one good things about nukes to date is that except for a few close calls MAD tends to prevent world wars. Who knows if that will continue to be the case...
Read this book last year. You probably mean chintentional use, but the number of accidents is astoundingly high.
We? lost a silo in Arkansas. Not sure if that is what the book is about.
I agree with Yellow though - the A bomb was nothing special in regards to killing and MAD has been a big part of the kind of peace since WW2. Never meant to imply that we killed the 50 million.
The point is there was a training exercise for D Day that killed thousands749. And CNN video of Normandy would have ended the war on the spot.
Does it count as a training exercise if ze Germans attack in the middle of it?
Are you disagreeing with my point?
Sort of. War is a blunt instrument. So if your poont is that once we declare war, we take off the proverbial gloves, I can see where you're coming from - even if I don't 100% agree.
The big world wars of the 20th century were wars of survival - and they were brutal as fuck, and there wasn't really much in the way of "rules of engagement."
That sickened so many people that they revised the Geneva Conventions in 1949. US and NATO ROE are based on our adherence to those revisions.
We're not fighting wars of national survival right now. We're fighting expeditionary, for lack of a better term, imperial wars. So the rules are a little different as are the desired end-states.
My point was video killed the war hero
I was there when Vietnam was in our living room every night
D Day was a horror even at the time and if it was shown we would wonder in a hurry if Europe was worth it.
Jesus Christ people, PALs have been an effective part of negative control of nukes since forever. A missile malfunction or bomber crash isn't a fucking close call.
Define 'forever'. I don't have the book in front of me, but as I recall from it, PALs weren't widespread and active to surprisingly late in the game. We? got very lucky on multiple occasions.
Just about as early as we've had nukes. Primitive in the beginning, yes, but still effective for negative control. Nukes don't detonate if they're in a fire or accidentally dropped. It's not how they work.
The serious close calls have been with warning systems giving false positives on potential attacks, forcing decisionmakers to shit bricks.
Jesus Christ people, PALs have been an effective part of negative control of nukes since forever. A missile malfunction or bomber crash isn't a fucking close call.
You're right, but not because of PALs. PALs were only really brought into use in the 1970's or so. Nukes are actually pretty hard to initiate. One of the render-safe procedures for certain nuclear ordnance used by the US in the 1970's and 1980's was to attach a shaped charge to a pre-marked point on the exterior of the ordnance in question and light her up. This had the effect of deflagrating the HE inside the casing.
It takes a hell of a lot of energy to spin up the reaction in an atomic bomb and that energy is often attained by the detonation of high explosives within the warhead. But most HE is pretty hard to piss off as well. You can fire a bullet into a brick of C4 and it won't do anything (usually). You can also set fire to C4 and use it to cook. Just don't set the pan down too hard on the residue - because that shit is pissed off.
So if the fuze to initiate the conventional HE isn't present, it is very unlikely that the HE will detonate, let alone the nuke.
The point on Israel or us? in Iraq is that the good guys lose by being good guys. FDR had the luxury of complete censorship as we did our part in the death of 50 million people or so to get rid of Hitler and Tojo
That's why I am now anti war because we will do what we did in Iraq. Kick their ass in 15 minutes then give it all back over the next years. Israel has the same issues. But to think Hamas can kick anyone's ass is retarded. And it shows your bias
Chinterestingly enough, in spite of Little Man/Fat Boy, Tokyo, Dresden, et al, The US only accounted for a relatively small fraction of the 50 to 75 million killed in WWII. That body count was almost entirely Japanese killing Chinese, Soviets killing Germans (and whoever else Stalin wanted shot), and Germans killing everyone east of the Molotov - Ribbentrop line. Hell, RAF bomber command actually killed more kraut civilians than the USAAF did.
Pretty sure the Bombing of Tokyo had about the same number of deaths as Little Man/Fat Boy. Today's nukes are literally 1000x more powerful, so results would be a little different now.
Correct, but not so much my point here. Just random fun facting that most the death and destruction of WWII was not in fact inflicted by America in spite our overwhelming industrial might. The one good things about nukes to date is that except for a few close calls MAD tends to prevent world wars. Who knows if that will continue to be the case...
Read this book last year. You probably mean chintentional use, but the number of accidents is astoundingly high.
We? lost a silo in Arkansas. Not sure if that is what the book is about.
I agree with Yellow though - the A bomb was nothing special in regards to killing and MAD has been a big part of the kind of peace since WW2. Never meant to imply that we killed the 50 million.
The point is there was a training exercise for D Day that killed thousands749. And CNN video of Normandy would have ended the war on the spot.
Does it count as a training exercise if ze Germans attack in the middle of it?
Are you disagreeing with my point?
Sort of. War is a blunt instrument. So if your poont is that once we declare war, we take off the proverbial gloves, I can see where you're coming from - even if I don't 100% agree.
The big world wars of the 20th century were wars of survival - and they were brutal as fuck, and there wasn't really much in the way of "rules of engagement."
That sickened so many people that they revised the Geneva Conventions in 1949. US and NATO ROE are based on our adherence to those revisions.
We're not fighting wars of national survival right now. We're fighting expeditionary, for lack of a better term, imperial wars. So the rules are a little different as are the desired end-states.
The point on Israel or us? in Iraq is that the good guys lose by being good guys. FDR had the luxury of complete censorship as we did our part in the death of 50 million people or so to get rid of Hitler and Tojo
That's why I am now anti war because we will do what we did in Iraq. Kick their ass in 15 minutes then give it all back over the next years. Israel has the same issues. But to think Hamas can kick anyone's ass is retarded. And it shows your bias
Chinterestingly enough, in spite of Little Man/Fat Boy, Tokyo, Dresden, et al, The US only accounted for a relatively small fraction of the 50 to 75 million killed in WWII. That body count was almost entirely Japanese killing Chinese, Soviets killing Germans (and whoever else Stalin wanted shot), and Germans killing everyone east of the Molotov - Ribbentrop line. Hell, RAF bomber command actually killed more kraut civilians than the USAAF did.
Pretty sure the Bombing of Tokyo had about the same number of deaths as Little Man/Fat Boy. Today's nukes are literally 1000x more powerful, so results would be a little different now.
Correct, but not so much my point here. Just random fun facting that most the death and destruction of WWII was not in fact inflicted by America in spite our overwhelming industrial might. The one good things about nukes to date is that except for a few close calls MAD tends to prevent world wars. Who knows if that will continue to be the case...
Read this book last year. You probably mean chintentional use, but the number of accidents is astoundingly high.
We? lost a silo in Arkansas. Not sure if that is what the book is about.
I agree with Yellow though - the A bomb was nothing special in regards to killing and MAD has been a big part of the kind of peace since WW2. Never meant to imply that we killed the 50 million.
The point is there was a training exercise for D Day that killed thousands749. And CNN video of Normandy would have ended the war on the spot.
Does it count as a training exercise if ze Germans attack in the middle of it?
Are you disagreeing with my point?
Sort of. War is a blunt instrument. So if your poont is that once we declare war, we take off the proverbial gloves, I can see where you're coming from - even if I don't 100% agree.
The big world wars of the 20th century were wars of survival - and they were brutal as fuck, and there wasn't really much in the way of "rules of engagement."
That sickened so many people that they revised the Geneva Conventions in 1949. US and NATO ROE are based on our adherence to those revisions.
We're not fighting wars of national survival right now. We're fighting expeditionary, for lack of a better term, imperial wars. So the rules are a little different as are the desired end-states.
My point was video killed the war hero
I was there when Vietnam was in our living room every night
D Day was a horror even at the time and if it was shown we would wonder in a hurry if Europe was worth it.
Nobody sees the video from war now either. After Vietnam, the Pentagon got really touchy about how reporters got access to conflict zones and what they were able to see and where they were sent. Part of the reason Chelsea Manning did 7 years is because she revealed some of that shit (ironically, a reporter getting killed by a helicopter gunship, if I remember correctly).
The point on Israel or us? in Iraq is that the good guys lose by being good guys. FDR had the luxury of complete censorship as we did our part in the death of 50 million people or so to get rid of Hitler and Tojo
That's why I am now anti war because we will do what we did in Iraq. Kick their ass in 15 minutes then give it all back over the next years. Israel has the same issues. But to think Hamas can kick anyone's ass is retarded. And it shows your bias
Chinterestingly enough, in spite of Little Man/Fat Boy, Tokyo, Dresden, et al, The US only accounted for a relatively small fraction of the 50 to 75 million killed in WWII. That body count was almost entirely Japanese killing Chinese, Soviets killing Germans (and whoever else Stalin wanted shot), and Germans killing everyone east of the Molotov - Ribbentrop line. Hell, RAF bomber command actually killed more kraut civilians than the USAAF did.
Pretty sure the Bombing of Tokyo had about the same number of deaths as Little Man/Fat Boy. Today's nukes are literally 1000x more powerful, so results would be a little different now.
Correct, but not so much my point here. Just random fun facting that most the death and destruction of WWII was not in fact inflicted by America in spite our overwhelming industrial might. The one good things about nukes to date is that except for a few close calls MAD tends to prevent world wars. Who knows if that will continue to be the case...
Read this book last year. You probably mean chintentional use, but the number of accidents is astoundingly high.
We? lost a silo in Arkansas. Not sure if that is what the book is about.
I agree with Yellow though - the A bomb was nothing special in regards to killing and MAD has been a big part of the kind of peace since WW2. Never meant to imply that we killed the 50 million.
The point is there was a training exercise for D Day that killed thousands749. And CNN video of Normandy would have ended the war on the spot.
Does it count as a training exercise if ze Germans attack in the middle of it?
Are you disagreeing with my point?
Sort of. War is a blunt instrument. So if your poont is that once we declare war, we take off the proverbial gloves, I can see where you're coming from - even if I don't 100% agree.
The big world wars of the 20th century were wars of survival - and they were brutal as fuck, and there wasn't really much in the way of "rules of engagement."
That sickened so many people that they revised the Geneva Conventions in 1949. US and NATO ROE are based on our adherence to those revisions.
We're not fighting wars of national survival right now. We're fighting expeditionary, for lack of a better term, imperial wars. So the rules are a little different as are the desired end-states.
My point was video killed the war hero
I was there when Vietnam was in our living room every night
D Day was a horror even at the time and if it was shown we would wonder in a hurry if Europe was worth it.
Nobody sees the video from war now either. After Vietnam, the Pentagon got really touchy about how reporters got access to conflict zones and what they were able to see and where they were sent. Part of the reason Chelsea Manning did 7 years is because she revealed some of that shit (ironically, a reporter getting killed by a helicopter gunship, if I remember correctly).
Well fuck you for this.
I looked up Chelsea Manning for wood or not and found out she has transformed into a dude.
The point on Israel or us? in Iraq is that the good guys lose by being good guys. FDR had the luxury of complete censorship as we did our part in the death of 50 million people or so to get rid of Hitler and Tojo
That's why I am now anti war because we will do what we did in Iraq. Kick their ass in 15 minutes then give it all back over the next years. Israel has the same issues. But to think Hamas can kick anyone's ass is retarded. And it shows your bias
Chinterestingly enough, in spite of Little Man/Fat Boy, Tokyo, Dresden, et al, The US only accounted for a relatively small fraction of the 50 to 75 million killed in WWII. That body count was almost entirely Japanese killing Chinese, Soviets killing Germans (and whoever else Stalin wanted shot), and Germans killing everyone east of the Molotov - Ribbentrop line. Hell, RAF bomber command actually killed more kraut civilians than the USAAF did.
Pretty sure the Bombing of Tokyo had about the same number of deaths as Little Man/Fat Boy. Today's nukes are literally 1000x more powerful, so results would be a little different now.
Correct, but not so much my point here. Just random fun facting that most the death and destruction of WWII was not in fact inflicted by America in spite our overwhelming industrial might. The one good things about nukes to date is that except for a few close calls MAD tends to prevent world wars. Who knows if that will continue to be the case...
Read this book last year. You probably mean chintentional use, but the number of accidents is astoundingly high.
We? lost a silo in Arkansas. Not sure if that is what the book is about.
I agree with Yellow though - the A bomb was nothing special in regards to killing and MAD has been a big part of the kind of peace since WW2. Never meant to imply that we killed the 50 million.
The point is there was a training exercise for D Day that killed thousands749. And CNN video of Normandy would have ended the war on the spot.
Does it count as a training exercise if ze Germans attack in the middle of it?
Are you disagreeing with my point?
Sort of. War is a blunt instrument. So if your poont is that once we declare war, we take off the proverbial gloves, I can see where you're coming from - even if I don't 100% agree.
The big world wars of the 20th century were wars of survival - and they were brutal as fuck, and there wasn't really much in the way of "rules of engagement."
That sickened so many people that they revised the Geneva Conventions in 1949. US and NATO ROE are based on our adherence to those revisions.
We're not fighting wars of national survival right now. We're fighting expeditionary, for lack of a better term, imperial wars. So the rules are a little different as are the desired end-states.
My point was video killed the war hero
I was there when Vietnam was in our living room every night
D Day was a horror even at the time and if it was shown we would wonder in a hurry if Europe was worth it.
Nobody sees the video from war now either. After Vietnam, the Pentagon got really touchy about how reporters got access to conflict zones and what they were able to see and where they were sent. Part of the reason Chelsea Manning did 7 years is because she revealed some of that shit (ironically, a reporter getting killed by a helicopter gunship, if I remember correctly).
Well fuck you for this.
I looked up Chelsea Manning for wood or not and found out she has transformed into a dude.
Jesus Christ people, PALs have been an effective part of negative control of nukes since forever. A missile malfunction or bomber crash isn't a fucking close call.
You're right, but not because of PALs. PALs were only really brought into use in the 1970's or so. Nukes are actually pretty hard to initiate. One of the render-safe procedures for certain nuclear ordnance used by the US in the 1970's and 1980's was to attach a shaped charge to a pre-marked point on the exterior of the ordnance in question and light her up. This had the effect of deflagrating the HE inside the casing.
It takes a hell of a lot of energy to spin up the reaction in an atomic bomb and that energy is often attained by the detonation of high explosives within the warhead. But most HE is pretty hard to piss off as well. You can fire a bullet into a brick of C4 and it won't do anything (usually). You can also set fire to C4 and use it to cook. Just don't set the pan down too hard on the residue - because that shit is pissed off.
So if the fuze to initiate the conventional HE isn't present, it is very unlikely that the HE will detonate, let alone the nuke.
It's mostly HE compression of a core that causes critical mass and thus fissile detonation; later generations used fission as a fusion trigger, since extremely high temperatures and pressures are required to start the process. Neutron reflection/capture techniques to speed up the fission and fusion processes, so that fuel is spent before the heat blows the core apart, have been some of the most closely guarded military secrets we keep.
Jesus Christ people, PALs have been an effective part of negative control of nukes since forever. A missile malfunction or bomber crash isn't a fucking close call.
You're right, but not because of PALs. PALs were only really brought into use in the 1970's or so. Nukes are actually pretty hard to initiate. One of the render-safe procedures for certain nuclear ordnance used by the US in the 1970's and 1980's was to attach a shaped charge to a pre-marked point on the exterior of the ordnance in question and light her up. This had the effect of deflagrating the HE inside the casing.
It takes a hell of a lot of energy to spin up the reaction in an atomic bomb and that energy is often attained by the detonation of high explosives within the warhead. But most HE is pretty hard to piss off as well. You can fire a bullet into a brick of C4 and it won't do anything (usually). You can also set fire to C4 and use it to cook. Just don't set the pan down too hard on the residue - because that shit is pissed off.
So if the fuze to initiate the conventional HE isn't present, it is very unlikely that the HE will detonate, let alone the nuke.
It's mostly HE compression of a core that causes critical mass and thus fissile detonation; later generations used fission as a fusion trigger, since extremely high temperatures and pressures are required to start the process. Neutron reflection/capture techniques to speed up the fission and fusion processes, so that fuel is spent before the heat blows the core apart, have been some of the most closely guarded military secrets we keep.
um, yeah. Imagine my surprise when I learned to disable one by strapping a shape charge to the side of it.
Jesus Christ people, PALs have been an effective part of negative control of nukes since forever. A missile malfunction or bomber crash isn't a fucking close call.
You're right, but not because of PALs. PALs were only really brought into use in the 1970's or so. Nukes are actually pretty hard to initiate. One of the render-safe procedures for certain nuclear ordnance used by the US in the 1970's and 1980's was to attach a shaped charge to a pre-marked point on the exterior of the ordnance in question and light her up. This had the effect of deflagrating the HE inside the casing.
It takes a hell of a lot of energy to spin up the reaction in an atomic bomb and that energy is often attained by the detonation of high explosives within the warhead. But most HE is pretty hard to piss off as well. You can fire a bullet into a brick of C4 and it won't do anything (usually). You can also set fire to C4 and use it to cook. Just don't set the pan down too hard on the residue - because that shit is pissed off.
So if the fuze to initiate the conventional HE isn't present, it is very unlikely that the HE will detonate, let alone the nuke.
It's mostly HE compression of a core that causes critical mass and thus fissile detonation; later generations used fission as a fusion trigger, since extremely high temperatures and pressures are required to start the process. Neutron reflection/capture techniques to speed up the fission and fusion processes, so that fuel is spent before the heat blows the core apart, have been some of the most closely guarded military secrets we keep.
um, yeah. Imagine my surprise when I learned to disable one by strapping a shape charge to the side of it.
My poont was that it's not the energy from the HE that causes detonation; it is that the HE explosion is specifically shaped so as to compress the core so that it achieves critical mass and detonates on its own accord. You can misshape the HE by using the shape charge and render it unable to compress the core and cause detonation, even if you don't disable the HE itself. A misshapen HE charge would explode and squeeze/squirt the core without compressing it to the poont of detonation.
Jesus Christ people, PALs have been an effective part of negative control of nukes since forever. A missile malfunction or bomber crash isn't a fucking close call.
You're right, but not because of PALs. PALs were only really brought into use in the 1970's or so. Nukes are actually pretty hard to initiate. One of the render-safe procedures for certain nuclear ordnance used by the US in the 1970's and 1980's was to attach a shaped charge to a pre-marked point on the exterior of the ordnance in question and light her up. This had the effect of deflagrating the HE inside the casing.
It takes a hell of a lot of energy to spin up the reaction in an atomic bomb and that energy is often attained by the detonation of high explosives within the warhead. But most HE is pretty hard to piss off as well. You can fire a bullet into a brick of C4 and it won't do anything (usually). You can also set fire to C4 and use it to cook. Just don't set the pan down too hard on the residue - because that shit is pissed off.
So if the fuze to initiate the conventional HE isn't present, it is very unlikely that the HE will detonate, let alone the nuke.
It's mostly HE compression of a core that causes critical mass and thus fissile detonation; later generations used fission as a fusion trigger, since extremely high temperatures and pressures are required to start the process. Neutron reflection/capture techniques to speed up the fission and fusion processes, so that fuel is spent before the heat blows the core apart, have been some of the most closely guarded military secrets we keep.
um, yeah. Imagine my surprise when I learned to disable one by strapping a shape charge to the side of it.
My poont was that it's not the energy from the HE that causes detonation; it is that the HE explosion is specifically shaped so as to compress the core so that it achieves critical mass and detonates on its own accord. You can misshape the HE by using the shape charge and render it unable to compress the core and cause detonation, even if you don't disable the HE itself. A misshapen HE charge would explode and squeeze/squirt the core without compressing it to the poont of detonation.
Sounds right to me, I was at Eglin last in 2007, so it's been a while. I also paint with a broad brush. But yep, still weird to me. You blow up a nuke to keep it from blowing up, like you have to destroy the village to save it. You should see what the fucker looks like afterward.
Jesus Christ people, PALs have been an effective part of negative control of nukes since forever. A missile malfunction or bomber crash isn't a fucking close call.
You're right, but not because of PALs. PALs were only really brought into use in the 1970's or so. Nukes are actually pretty hard to initiate. One of the render-safe procedures for certain nuclear ordnance used by the US in the 1970's and 1980's was to attach a shaped charge to a pre-marked point on the exterior of the ordnance in question and light her up. This had the effect of deflagrating the HE inside the casing.
It takes a hell of a lot of energy to spin up the reaction in an atomic bomb and that energy is often attained by the detonation of high explosives within the warhead. But most HE is pretty hard to piss off as well. You can fire a bullet into a brick of C4 and it won't do anything (usually). You can also set fire to C4 and use it to cook. Just don't set the pan down too hard on the residue - because that shit is pissed off.
So if the fuze to initiate the conventional HE isn't present, it is very unlikely that the HE will detonate, let alone the nuke.
It's mostly HE compression of a core that causes critical mass and thus fissile detonation; later generations used fission as a fusion trigger, since extremely high temperatures and pressures are required to start the process. Neutron reflection/capture techniques to speed up the fission and fusion processes, so that fuel is spent before the heat blows the core apart, have been some of the most closely guarded military secrets we keep.
um, yeah. Imagine my surprise when I learned to disable one by strapping a shape charge to the side of it.
My poont was that it's not the energy from the HE that causes detonation; it is that the HE explosion is specifically shaped so as to compress the core so that it achieves critical mass and detonates on its own accord. You can misshape the HE by using the shape charge and render it unable to compress the core and cause detonation, even if you don't disable the HE itself. A misshapen HE charge would explode and squeeze/squirt the core without compressing it to the poont of detonation.
Sounds right to me, I was at Eglin last in 2007, so it's been a while. I also paint with a broad brush. But yep, still weird to me. You blow up a nuke to keep it from blowing up, like you have to destroy the village to save it. You should see what the fucker looks like afterward.
Comments
I was there when Vietnam was in our living room every night
D Day was a horror even at the time and if it was shown we would wonder in a hurry if Europe was worth it.
The serious close calls have been with warning systems giving false positives on potential attacks, forcing decisionmakers to shit bricks.
Hard to cry about white privilege and other shit when you're getting shot at.
It takes a hell of a lot of energy to spin up the reaction in an atomic bomb and that energy is often attained by the detonation of high explosives within the warhead. But most HE is pretty hard to piss off as well. You can fire a bullet into a brick of C4 and it won't do anything (usually). You can also set fire to C4 and use it to cook. Just don't set the pan down too hard on the residue - because that shit is pissed off.
So if the fuze to initiate the conventional HE isn't present, it is very unlikely that the HE will detonate, let alone the nuke.
I looked up Chelsea Manning for wood or not and found out she has transformed into a dude.