Discussion:
Islamic State orders Muslims to commit jihad massacres in Rome as jihadis posing as refugees stream into Europe [Islamic, Muslim terrorism]
(too old to reply)
Dr. Jai Maharaj
2017-11-25 20:20:52 UTC
Permalink
Islamic State orders Muslims to commit jihad massacres in
Rome as jihadis posing as refugees stream into Europe

jihadwatch.org
Saturday, November 25, 2017

https://www.jihadwatch.org/2017/11/islamic-state-orders-muslims-to-commit-jihad-massacres-in-rome-as-jihadis-posing-as-refugees-stream-into-europe

Jai Maharaj, Jyotishi
Om Shanti

http://bit.do/jaimaharaj
w***@yahoo.com.sg
2017-11-26 04:13:01 UTC
Permalink
Jihadists cannot tolerate Christianity in Europe.

Wakalukong
Byker
2017-11-26 18:52:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by w***@yahoo.com.sg
Jihadists cannot tolerate Christianity in Europe.
Viktor Orbán: “Will There be a Christian Europe?”:


Christian Civilization is "Spirit of the Age"


Europe's Muslims hate the West: https://tinyurl.com/ybejadkg

https://rcg.org/realtruth/articles/253-wice.html

http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/260179/why-west-should-listen-hungary-muslim-refugees-raymond-ibrahim
Byker
2017-11-26 18:52:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by w***@yahoo.com.sg
Jihadists cannot tolerate Christianity in Europe.
It's time for another Crusade:

http://www.catholic.org/news/international/asia/story.php?id=50648

https://www.quora.com/What-would-happen-if-the-Pope-called-out-another-crusade-now

https://www.duffelblog.com/2016/03/poll-support-for-another-crusade-highest-since-14th-century/

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2014/08/11/the-fifth-crusade-pope-francis-calls-for-armed-christian-crusades-against-islam/

http://shoebat.com/2015/04/20/a-new-crusade-must-be-declared-against-islam-and-christendom-must-rise-again-to-have-the-cross-crush-the-crescent/
Byker
2017-11-26 18:52:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by w***@yahoo.com.sg
Jihadists cannot tolerate Christianity in Europe.
It's time for another Crusade: https://tinyurl.com/yasp9cwj



https://au.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20060815074530AAKtkXq

http://gatesofvienna.net/2016/05/what-happens-if-the-someone-nukes-the-black-cube/

Would Muslims still pray in the direction of Mecca after it's nuked?:
https://tinyurl.com/yayptw42

https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/whatwould-happen-to-islam-if-mecca-and-medina-were-destroyed.10498/

"[W]e must demonstrate—in an absolutely unmistakable way—that the Moslem
religion is not favored by God. The most convincing way of doing this is by
(after suitable warnings) totally destroying several Moslem holy sites,
including Mecca and Medina. We should announce in advance the dates when
those places will be destroyed, and that Allah is either unwilling or unable
to protect them. We should then, using nuclear weapons, proceed to vaporize
each of those sites in sequence. (In order to avoid unnecessary loss of
life, the first two or three such sites should be sparsely populated, and
the inhabitants of Mecca and Medina should be given a reasonable length of
time to evacuate.). Since most Moslems believe that the truth of Muhammad’s
statements were demonstrated by his military victories, the total
destruction of those cities cannot be reconciled with Islam. It is therefore
probable that over the course of a century the number of Moslems in the
world will drop drastically. Some Moslems will convert to other religions;
some will become agnostics or atheists; and those who remain “Moslem” will
break up into many small sects. In any event, bereft of military power,
oil—and the diplomatic power that brings—and money, Islam will lose much of
its appeal and will cease to be a menace."
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/008991.html
Mr. B1ack
2017-11-26 19:01:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Byker
Post by w***@yahoo.com.sg
Jihadists cannot tolerate Christianity in Europe.
It's time for another Crusade: https://tinyurl.com/yasp9cwj
http://youtu.be/wpPcH8nuto4
https://au.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20060815074530AAKtkXq
http://gatesofvienna.net/2016/05/what-happens-if-the-someone-nukes-the-black-cube/
https://tinyurl.com/yayptw42
https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/whatwould-happen-to-islam-if-mecca-and-medina-were-destroyed.10498/
"[W]e must demonstrate—in an absolutely unmistakable way—that the Moslem
religion is not favored by God. The most convincing way of doing this is by
(after suitable warnings) totally destroying several Moslem holy sites,
including Mecca and Medina. We should announce in advance the dates when
those places will be destroyed, and that Allah is either unwilling or unable
to protect them. We should then, using nuclear weapons, proceed to vaporize
each of those sites in sequence. (In order to avoid unnecessary loss of
life, the first two or three such sites should be sparsely populated, and
the inhabitants of Mecca and Medina should be given a reasonable length of
time to evacuate.). Since most Moslems believe that the truth of Muhammad’s
statements were demonstrated by his military victories, the total
destruction of those cities cannot be reconciled with Islam. It is therefore
probable that over the course of a century the number of Moslems in the
world will drop drastically. Some Moslems will convert to other religions;
some will become agnostics or atheists; and those who remain “Moslem” will
break up into many small sects. In any event, bereft of military power,
oil—and the diplomatic power that brings—and money, Islam will lose much of
its appeal and will cease to be a menace."
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/008991.html
Um ......... calling for a jihad against the jihad ?

Kinda like curing smallpox with rabies IMHO.

What needs to die is the "holy war" meme. Ain't
gonna be easy, but the results would be well
worth it.

Oh, and I keep hearing more and more people talk
as if nukes are normal acceptable tactical weapons.
They ain't. They're *different*.
Bubba
2017-11-26 20:53:20 UTC
Permalink
snip
Post by Mr. B1ack
Um ......... calling for a jihad against the jihad ?
Kinda like curing smallpox with rabies IMHO.
What needs to die is the "holy war" meme. Ain't
gonna be easy, but the results would be well
worth it.
Oh, and I keep hearing more and more people talk
as if nukes are normal acceptable tactical weapons.
They ain't. They're *different*.
Indeed, global thermonuclear holocaust is
the abomination into desolation, ergo ELE.

2431652.9787 Atomic Bomb =~ 1945.538 AD

As in World War Two, the US Military will
launch the first nuclear strike...the end.
--
Bub
Dennis
2017-11-27 05:31:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bubba
Post by Mr. B1ack
Oh, and I keep hearing more and more people talk
as if nukes are normal acceptable tactical weapons.
They ain't. They're *different*.
Indeed, global thermonuclear holocaust is
the abomination into desolation, ergo ELE.
2431652.9787 Atomic Bomb =~ 1945.538 AD
??? What is that? Days Julian?

Dennis
Mr. B1ack
2017-11-28 02:21:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bubba
snip
Post by Mr. B1ack
Um ......... calling for a jihad against the jihad ?
Kinda like curing smallpox with rabies IMHO.
What needs to die is the "holy war" meme. Ain't
gonna be easy, but the results would be well
worth it.
Oh, and I keep hearing more and more people talk
as if nukes are normal acceptable tactical weapons.
They ain't. They're *different*.
Indeed, global thermonuclear holocaust is
the abomination into desolation, ergo ELE.
2431652.9787 Atomic Bomb =~ 1945.538 AD
As in World War Two, the US Military will
launch the first nuclear strike...the end.
I don't think we would. Much more likely to be
some extreme place like NK or Iran where
ideology beats humanity every damned time.

It's the measure of the RESPONSE that'll make a
lot of difference. Go berserk, shower a bunch of
countries with fallout, and it'll escalate. A surgical
response and it won't.

Alas while Iran is nukable, NK really isn't. All its
military assets are way spread out, many are
buried deep, many are mobile. The cities and
civvies don't MEAN anything to Kim - hell, the
'capital' is a Potempkin village, nobody's there.
Even worse, it's sandwiched smack in the
middle of four important countries - no way to
keep the fallout off of them. Missile-interception
is our only good tool there.
Byker
2017-11-28 20:32:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mr. B1ack
Post by Bubba
As in World War Two, the US Military will
launch the first nuclear strike...the end.
I don't think we would.
Wait until after a nuclear 9/11.
Post by Mr. B1ack
It's the measure of the RESPONSE that'll make a
lot of difference. Go berserk, shower a bunch of
countries with fallout, and it'll escalate. A surgical
response and it won't.
Fallout can be kept to a minimum with air bursts...
Mr. B1ack
2017-11-29 03:38:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Byker
Post by Mr. B1ack
Post by Bubba
As in World War Two, the US Military will
launch the first nuclear strike...the end.
I don't think we would.
Wait until after a nuclear 9/11.
Well then we wouldn't be the first .... only
the outraged victim.
Post by Byker
Post by Mr. B1ack
It's the measure of the RESPONSE that'll make a
lot of difference. Go berserk, shower a bunch of
countries with fallout, and it'll escalate. A surgical
response and it won't.
Fallout can be kept to a minimum with air bursts...
Even "minimal" fallout from a cluster of nukes
is WAY too much fallout.

And, BTW, if you're going after hard/buried targets
you have to use ground blasts. VAST quantities of
shit created from those. NKs important stuff is
tunnelled into hard rock, so cleaner underground
blasts aren't gonna work very well since no warhead
can penetrate such material.

There isn't much TO "air burst" in NK anyhow. The
cities don't count, mostly fake, and a lot of their
missile launchers and artillery are mobile and
spread out. They KNOW how to nullify our
firepower advantages.

So just forget the idea of a "clean" nukewar with NK.
Ain't happening.

Iran would be a better nuke target. NK, not.

We need to be able to intercept NK missiles before
they can even gain much altitude - with high precision.
Dunno if we have that tech. The THADD batteries
are a fair (but not great) second line of defense.
Kick-butt laser satellites or big hypersonic "drones"
armed with lasers or neutral particle beam weapons
are the ticket here.

There seem to be a lot of "classified" space launches
recently ... I wonder what they're putting up there ?
Better DO something ... not just LOOK at it.

Oh yea ... worth considering ... while we're watching
the skies, NK could basically Fed-Ex nukes to our
big cities. If you can smuggle a pallet of weed you
can smuggle a compact thermonuke.

LA, SanFran/Oakland, Seattle, Chicago, NYC, DC,
Boston .... 250kt to each. That'd put a SERIOUS
hurt on us. Add a few kilos of cobalt and the serious
would continue for hundreds of years. Drop an
especially dirty one in Oklahoma and the fallout
would contaminate most of the corn/wheat belt.
We ARE vulnerable to even a "small" nuclear
aggressor.

And Japan ... SO many people packed into SUCH
a small space - fish in a barrel.
Byker
2017-11-29 04:49:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mr. B1ack
Even "minimal" fallout from a cluster of nukes
is WAY too much fallout.
Fallout didn't exist at either Hiroshima or Nagasaki (both air bursts).
Post by Mr. B1ack
And, BTW, if you're going after hard/buried targets
you have to use ground blasts. VAST quantities of
shit created from those. NKs important stuff is
tunnelled into hard rock, so cleaner underground
blasts aren't gonna work very well since no warhead
can penetrate such material.
For deep penetration, just keep the yield down to <15 KT and use precision
guidance like you would with regular JDAMS. Radioactive ejecta would be
confined to the immediate area...
Byker
2017-11-29 23:08:12 UTC
Permalink
depends on how one defines fallout. nuclear (that is, fission) weapons
generated enough radiation, but what matters is the decay of the isotopes
involved,
And that's the key. The isotopes released by nuclear explosions have much
shorter half-lives than those in nuclear reactors.

You may remember the "rule of sevens" from the Cold War. 7 hours after a
fission detonation, the fallout radiation has declined by a factor of 10.
After 49 hours, it's down by a factor of 100. After two weeks, it's down by
1,000. That's why civil defense pamphlets recommended staying in fallout
shelters for two weeks. After three months, its down to 1/10,000th of what
it was, and even the edge of the crater can be walked around without risk of
illness, though there may be a cancer hazard years later.

Within seven months of the Sedan test (1962, 104 KT),
the bottom of the crater could
be safely walked upon with no protective clothing:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedan_(nuclear_test). BTW, it's listed on the
National Register of Historic Places, and gets about 10,000 visitors a year.

The Soviets did one of their own three years later:
.

Care for a dip?:
http://www.popsci.com.au/science/atomic-lake-now-safe-enough-to-swim,390298
Byker
2017-11-29 23:08:32 UTC
Permalink
He forgets (or fails to mention) that the radiation will restrict movement
of civilians and troops.
I depends on when you plan on moving them.
Just nuke them into a corner and come back a century later Part of the
ABCD course I did (now called NBC) showed the effects of radiation
sickness and how it affects physical health.
Then you would know about the rate of radioactive decay. You wouldn't have
to wait a century. Three months would suffice. Just equip everyone with a
dosimeter...
Mr. B1ack
2017-11-30 23:30:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Byker
Post by Mr. B1ack
Even "minimal" fallout from a cluster of nukes
is WAY too much fallout.
Fallout didn't exist at either Hiroshima or Nagasaki (both air bursts).
Um ... whatever you read, read it again .......
Post by Byker
Post by Mr. B1ack
And, BTW, if you're going after hard/buried targets
you have to use ground blasts. VAST quantities of
shit created from those. NKs important stuff is
tunnelled into hard rock, so cleaner underground
blasts aren't gonna work very well since no warhead
can penetrate such material.
For deep penetration, just keep the yield down to <15 KT and use precision
guidance like you would with regular JDAMS. Radioactive ejecta would be
confined to the immediate area...
No. It won't be.

And in NK, as I said, you'd not gonna GET "deep
penetration" from any kind of system - much of
the northern part is just hard rock. To be sure
you'd have to use a surface blast ... and if the
installation is buried deep you may need 100kt
to guarentee its destruction.

I think you WANT to nuke NK (andI don't blame
you) but we really CAN'T. It's just wedged in
there too tight between a bunch of countries we
definitely DON'T want to nuke.

However ... if NK strikes Japan and SK *first*
then we could get away with a little nuking in
retaliation (dunno if it'd do much good though).
NK would have create a shitload of fallout so
our contribution would be proportionally small.
But if NK hits just the US mainland ... sorry, we
may just have to suck it up and use conventional
retaliation.

You're allowed to defend yourself ... but that doesn't
mean you can irradiate a whole shitload of innocent
people while doing so.
Fred J. McCall
2017-12-01 04:01:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mr. B1ack
Post by Byker
Post by Mr. B1ack
Even "minimal" fallout from a cluster of nukes
is WAY too much fallout.
Fallout didn't exist at either Hiroshima or Nagasaki (both air bursts).
Um ... whatever you read, read it again .......
Post by Byker
Post by Mr. B1ack
And, BTW, if you're going after hard/buried targets
you have to use ground blasts. VAST quantities of
shit created from those. NKs important stuff is
tunnelled into hard rock, so cleaner underground
blasts aren't gonna work very well since no warhead
can penetrate such material.
For deep penetration, just keep the yield down to <15 KT and use precision
guidance like you would with regular JDAMS. Radioactive ejecta would be
confined to the immediate area...
No. It won't be.
Well, yeah, it mostly will be. For a low yield weapon, what comes out
won't reach more than a couple of miles from the blast.
Post by Mr. B1ack
And in NK, as I said, you'd not gonna GET "deep
penetration" from any kind of system - much of
the northern part is just hard rock. To be sure
you'd have to use a surface blast ... and if the
installation is buried deep you may need 100kt
to guarentee its destruction.
Nonsense. At the high end are systems like MOP that will penetrate
130 feet or so of rock. No reason you couldn't build a case for a
nuclear weapon that would perform as well.
Post by Mr. B1ack
I think you WANT to nuke NK (andI don't blame
you) but we really CAN'T. It's just wedged in
there too tight between a bunch of countries we
definitely DON'T want to nuke.
So don't nuke their neighbors. That's easy enough.
Post by Mr. B1ack
However ... if NK strikes Japan and SK *first*
then we could get away with a little nuking in
retaliation (dunno if it'd do much good though).
NK would have create a shitload of fallout so
our contribution would be proportionally small.
But if NK hits just the US mainland ... sorry, we
may just have to suck it up and use conventional
retaliation.
Don't be silly. If someone pops a nuke at us the world EXPECTS that
we will return the favor, since that's been US policy since there have
been nukes, and nobody is going to want to step into a nuclear war
with the United States started by North Korea.
Post by Mr. B1ack
You're allowed to defend yourself ... but that doesn't
mean you can irradiate a whole shitload of innocent
people while doing so.
So don't do that. You seem to overestimate the amount of fallout
generated and how far it reaches.
--
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to
live in the real world."
-- Mary Shafer, NASA Dryden
Mr. B1ack
2017-12-01 07:21:21 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 30 Nov 2017 21:01:44 -0700, Fred J. McCall
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by Mr. B1ack
Post by Byker
Post by Mr. B1ack
Even "minimal" fallout from a cluster of nukes
is WAY too much fallout.
Fallout didn't exist at either Hiroshima or Nagasaki (both air bursts).
Um ... whatever you read, read it again .......
Post by Byker
Post by Mr. B1ack
And, BTW, if you're going after hard/buried targets
you have to use ground blasts. VAST quantities of
shit created from those. NKs important stuff is
tunnelled into hard rock, so cleaner underground
blasts aren't gonna work very well since no warhead
can penetrate such material.
For deep penetration, just keep the yield down to <15 KT and use precision
guidance like you would with regular JDAMS. Radioactive ejecta would be
confined to the immediate area...
No. It won't be.
Well, yeah, it mostly will be. For a low yield weapon, what comes out
won't reach more than a couple of miles from the blast.
Post by Mr. B1ack
And in NK, as I said, you'd not gonna GET "deep
penetration" from any kind of system - much of
the northern part is just hard rock. To be sure
you'd have to use a surface blast ... and if the
installation is buried deep you may need 100kt
to guarentee its destruction.
Nonsense. At the high end are systems like MOP that will penetrate
130 feet or so of rock. No reason you couldn't build a case for a
nuclear weapon that would perform as well.
Post by Mr. B1ack
I think you WANT to nuke NK (andI don't blame
you) but we really CAN'T. It's just wedged in
there too tight between a bunch of countries we
definitely DON'T want to nuke.
So don't nuke their neighbors. That's easy enough.
You're a fucking moron - and a hazard to humanity.

NK *cannot* be nuked. We have to find other ways.
A heavy pinpoint extermination attack on Kim and
his inner circle of synchophants is the best. Apologize
later. Without him, the narrow-based govt would
collapse upon itself instantly.

Lacking that ... the very very best in high-tech missile
interception systems is needed.
Byker
2017-12-01 15:32:33 UTC
Permalink
"Mr. B1ack" wrote in message news:***@4ax.com...

On Thu, 30 Nov 2017 21:01:44 -0700, Fred J. McCall
Post by Mr. B1ack
Post by Fred J. McCall
So don't nuke their neighbors. That's easy enough.
You're a fucking moron - and a hazard to humanity.
You know who's won the debate when it degenerates into name-calling...
Fred J. McCall
2017-12-01 17:15:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Thu, 30 Nov 2017 21:01:44 -0700, Fred J. McCall
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by Mr. B1ack
Post by Byker
Post by Mr. B1ack
Even "minimal" fallout from a cluster of nukes
is WAY too much fallout.
Fallout didn't exist at either Hiroshima or Nagasaki (both air bursts).
Um ... whatever you read, read it again .......
Post by Byker
Post by Mr. B1ack
And, BTW, if you're going after hard/buried targets
you have to use ground blasts. VAST quantities of
shit created from those. NKs important stuff is
tunnelled into hard rock, so cleaner underground
blasts aren't gonna work very well since no warhead
can penetrate such material.
For deep penetration, just keep the yield down to <15 KT and use precision
guidance like you would with regular JDAMS. Radioactive ejecta would be
confined to the immediate area...
No. It won't be.
Well, yeah, it mostly will be. For a low yield weapon, what comes out
won't reach more than a couple of miles from the blast.
Post by Mr. B1ack
And in NK, as I said, you'd not gonna GET "deep
penetration" from any kind of system - much of
the northern part is just hard rock. To be sure
you'd have to use a surface blast ... and if the
installation is buried deep you may need 100kt
to guarentee its destruction.
Nonsense. At the high end are systems like MOP that will penetrate
130 feet or so of rock. No reason you couldn't build a case for a
nuclear weapon that would perform as well.
Post by Mr. B1ack
I think you WANT to nuke NK (andI don't blame
you) but we really CAN'T. It's just wedged in
there too tight between a bunch of countries we
definitely DON'T want to nuke.
So don't nuke their neighbors. That's easy enough.
You're a fucking moron - and a hazard to humanity.
Brilliant and well reasoned rebuttal of the facts noted. NOT! Now
step away from the mirror.
Post by Mr. B1ack
NK *cannot* be nuked.
Why not? Your case for that position so far certainly doesn't stand
up.
Post by Mr. B1ack
We have to find other ways.
A heavy pinpoint extermination attack on Kim and
his inner circle of synchophants is the best. Apologize
later. Without him, the narrow-based govt would
collapse upon itself instantly.
You're deluded. You can't assassinate your way out of this and such
efforts almost inevitably end badly.
Post by Mr. B1ack
Lacking that ... the very very best in high-tech missile
interception systems is needed.
Yeah, because those are so cheap and 100% effective. You talk like
it's an 'either/or' situation. So let me see what we know about your
expertise so far. We know you're ignorant about geopolitics, nuclear
weapons effects, and now ABM systems. We don't know that you actually
know anything about anything, but some of your lacks are obvious.
--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the
truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
-- Thomas Jefferson
Mr. B1ack
2017-12-02 06:55:54 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 01 Dec 2017 10:15:11 -0700, Fred J. McCall
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Thu, 30 Nov 2017 21:01:44 -0700, Fred J. McCall
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by Mr. B1ack
Post by Byker
Post by Mr. B1ack
Even "minimal" fallout from a cluster of nukes
is WAY too much fallout.
Fallout didn't exist at either Hiroshima or Nagasaki (both air bursts).
Um ... whatever you read, read it again .......
Post by Byker
Post by Mr. B1ack
And, BTW, if you're going after hard/buried targets
you have to use ground blasts. VAST quantities of
shit created from those. NKs important stuff is
tunnelled into hard rock, so cleaner underground
blasts aren't gonna work very well since no warhead
can penetrate such material.
For deep penetration, just keep the yield down to <15 KT and use precision
guidance like you would with regular JDAMS. Radioactive ejecta would be
confined to the immediate area...
No. It won't be.
Well, yeah, it mostly will be. For a low yield weapon, what comes out
won't reach more than a couple of miles from the blast.
Post by Mr. B1ack
And in NK, as I said, you'd not gonna GET "deep
penetration" from any kind of system - much of
the northern part is just hard rock. To be sure
you'd have to use a surface blast ... and if the
installation is buried deep you may need 100kt
to guarentee its destruction.
Nonsense. At the high end are systems like MOP that will penetrate
130 feet or so of rock. No reason you couldn't build a case for a
nuclear weapon that would perform as well.
Post by Mr. B1ack
I think you WANT to nuke NK (andI don't blame
you) but we really CAN'T. It's just wedged in
there too tight between a bunch of countries we
definitely DON'T want to nuke.
So don't nuke their neighbors. That's easy enough.
You're a fucking moron - and a hazard to humanity.
Brilliant and well reasoned rebuttal of the facts noted. NOT! Now
step away from the mirror.
Sorry, but 2-digit IQ's HAVE to be called out.

You're just DESPERATE to invent reasons why
it's OK to drop a bunch of nukes on NK .... sick
sad and sorry - as well as just DUMB.

Fortunately you're not on the Joint Chiefs.

Nukes are not an option there - pointless, far too
much collateral damage. There ARE other ways.
We should use them now.
Fred J. McCall
2017-12-02 08:58:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Fri, 01 Dec 2017 10:15:11 -0700, Fred J. McCall
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Thu, 30 Nov 2017 21:01:44 -0700, Fred J. McCall
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by Mr. B1ack
Post by Byker
Post by Mr. B1ack
Even "minimal" fallout from a cluster of nukes
is WAY too much fallout.
Fallout didn't exist at either Hiroshima or Nagasaki (both air bursts).
Um ... whatever you read, read it again .......
Post by Byker
Post by Mr. B1ack
And, BTW, if you're going after hard/buried targets
you have to use ground blasts. VAST quantities of
shit created from those. NKs important stuff is
tunnelled into hard rock, so cleaner underground
blasts aren't gonna work very well since no warhead
can penetrate such material.
For deep penetration, just keep the yield down to <15 KT and use precision
guidance like you would with regular JDAMS. Radioactive ejecta would be
confined to the immediate area...
No. It won't be.
Well, yeah, it mostly will be. For a low yield weapon, what comes out
won't reach more than a couple of miles from the blast.
Post by Mr. B1ack
And in NK, as I said, you'd not gonna GET "deep
penetration" from any kind of system - much of
the northern part is just hard rock. To be sure
you'd have to use a surface blast ... and if the
installation is buried deep you may need 100kt
to guarentee its destruction.
Nonsense. At the high end are systems like MOP that will penetrate
130 feet or so of rock. No reason you couldn't build a case for a
nuclear weapon that would perform as well.
Post by Mr. B1ack
I think you WANT to nuke NK (andI don't blame
you) but we really CAN'T. It's just wedged in
there too tight between a bunch of countries we
definitely DON'T want to nuke.
So don't nuke their neighbors. That's easy enough.
You're a fucking moron - and a hazard to humanity.
Brilliant and well reasoned rebuttal of the facts noted. NOT! Now
step away from the mirror.
Sorry, but 2-digit IQ's HAVE to be called out.
I'll compare IQs with you and give you 20 points and still make you
look stupid, you pathetic twat.
Post by Mr. B1ack
You're just DESPERATE to invent reasons why
it's OK to drop a bunch of nukes on NK .... sick
sad and sorry - as well as just DUMB.
Delusional much, Zippy?
Post by Mr. B1ack
Fortunately you're not on the Joint Chiefs.
OK, we can add 'nuclear decision making' and 'nuclear targeting' to
the list of things you don't know shit about.

Hint: the Joint Chiefs aren't the ones who make the decision on
whether or not to employ nuclear weapons.
Post by Mr. B1ack
Nukes are not an option there - pointless, far too
much collateral damage.
Just what 'collateral damage' would there be in using nuclear weapons
against North Korea?
Post by Mr. B1ack
There ARE other ways. We should use them now.
Oh, really? Name those ways.
--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the
truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
-- Thomas Jefferson
d***@agent.com
2017-12-02 09:22:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by Mr. B1ack
Nukes are not an option there - pointless, far too
much collateral damage.
Just what 'collateral damage' would there be in using nuclear weapons
against North Korea?
Post by Mr. B1ack
There ARE other ways. We should use them now.
Oh, really? Name those ways.
==================
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by Mr. B1ack
Do you know anyone else who is trying to develop a
plan for world peace?
Sure, lots of people are. They've virtually all nutters with
unrealistic views of the world.
Can you give us a list of them along with what they're
saying, so we can make our own judgments?
Fred J. McCall
2017-12-03 00:33:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by Mr. B1ack
Nukes are not an option there - pointless, far too
much collateral damage.
Just what 'collateral damage' would there be in using nuclear weapons
against North Korea?
Post by Mr. B1ack
There ARE other ways. We should use them now.
Oh, really? Name those ways.
==================
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by Mr. B1ack
Do you know anyone else who is trying to develop a
plan for world peace?
Sure, lots of people are. They've virtually all nutters with
unrealistic views of the world.
Can you give us a list of them along with what they're
saying, so we can make our own judgments?
'Us'? You have a mouse in your pocket? If you want to make your own
judgements, do your own homework.
--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
only stupid."
-- Heinrich Heine
d***@agent.com
2017-12-03 07:26:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@agent.com
==================
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by Mr. B1ack
Do you know anyone else who is trying to develop a
plan for world peace?
Sure, lots of people are. They've virtually all nutters with
unrealistic views of the world.
Can you give us a list of them along with what they're
saying, so we can make our own judgments?
'Us'? If you want to make your own
judgements, do your own homework.
I asked you if you know anyone else trying to achieve peace,
and you said sure, lots of them. Well, who are they, and what
policies are they advocating?
Fred J. McCall
2017-12-03 11:27:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by d***@agent.com
==================
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by Mr. B1ack
Do you know anyone else who is trying to develop a
plan for world peace?
Sure, lots of people are. They've virtually all nutters with
unrealistic views of the world.
Can you give us a list of them along with what they're
saying, so we can make our own judgments?
'Us'? If you want to make your own
judgements, do your own homework.
I asked you if you know anyone else trying to achieve peace,
and you said sure, lots of them. Well, who are they, and what
policies are they advocating?
Again, if you want to make your own judgments, do your own homework.
--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn
d***@agent.com
2017-12-04 05:00:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by d***@agent.com
==================
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by Mr. B1ack
Do you know anyone else who is trying to develop a
plan for world peace?
Sure, lots of people are. They've virtually all nutters with
unrealistic views of the world.
Can you give us a list of them along with what they're
saying, so we can make our own judgments?
'Us'? If you want to make your own
judgements, do your own homework.
I asked you if you know anyone else trying to achieve peace,
and you said sure, lots of them. Well, who are they, and what
policies are they advocating?
Again, if you want to make your own judgments, do your own homework.
I have no idea how to find out who you know!
Vincent
2017-12-03 01:46:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@agent.com
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by Mr. B1ack
Nukes are not an option there - pointless, far too
much collateral damage.
Just what 'collateral damage' would there be in using nuclear weapons
against North Korea?
Post by Mr. B1ack
There ARE other ways. We should use them now.
Oh, really? Name those ways.
==================
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by Mr. B1ack
Do you know anyone else who is trying to develop a
plan for world peace?
Sure, lots of people are. They've virtually all nutters with
unrealistic views of the world.
Can you give us a list of them along with what they're
saying, so we can make our own judgments?
If you don't already know, then obviously you are too ignorant to
understand our form of Government anyway. Jeez...I hope you don't vote.
Kerryn Offord
2017-12-03 01:10:53 UTC
Permalink
<SNIP>
Post by Mr. B1ack
Nukes are not an option there - pointless, far too
much collateral damage.
Just what 'collateral damage' would there be in using nuclear weapons
against North Korea?
<SNIP>

South Korea, Japan, Maybe parts of China, parts of Russia.

Not just from NK strikes, but also fallout
george152
2017-12-03 03:08:02 UTC
Permalink
<SNIP>
  Nukes are not an option there - pointless, far too
  much collateral damage.
Just what 'collateral damage' would there be in using nuclear weapons
against North Korea?
<SNIP>
South Korea, Japan, Maybe parts of China, parts of Russia.
Not just from NK strikes, but also fallout
So China should be telling their pitbull dog to dial it back

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Fred J. McCall
2017-12-03 11:24:02 UTC
Permalink
<SNIP>
Post by Mr. B1ack
Nukes are not an option there - pointless, far too
much collateral damage.
Just what 'collateral damage' would there be in using nuclear weapons
against North Korea?
<SNIP>
South Korea, Japan, Maybe parts of China, parts of Russia.
Not just from NK strikes, but also fallout
I think you, like Mr Black, overestimate the reach and severity of
'fallout'. There are big chunks of North Korea you could nuke and not
worry about fallout going anywhere at any level that would affect
anything. Strikes by the enemy that might be made regardless of
whether we used nukes are not are generally not categorized as
'collateral damage' from our weapons. That shit is on them.
--
"Speed and Violence. Death and Destruction.
Someone's gonna die. We decide who."
--VWF 11 Targeting
Byker
2017-12-04 14:49:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kerryn Offord
South Korea, Japan, Maybe parts of China, parts of Russia.
Not just from NK strikes, but also fallout
Only if they're ground bursts
Vincent
2017-12-05 04:41:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Byker
Post by Kerryn Offord
South Korea, Japan, Maybe parts of China, parts of Russia.
Not just from NK strikes, but also fallout
Only if they're ground bursts
Even at altitude...The concussive expansion, the heat, lack of humidity
still causes ground debris to rise..mingle with radiation particulate
and to spread to the 4 corners of the earth by the prevailing winds.
True that a full ground burst is more contaminating.... But remember the
Strontium 90 scare of the 1950's? Well sir, it is almost 3 times that
right now.
Fred J. McCall
2017-12-05 10:52:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Vincent
Post by Byker
Post by Kerryn Offord
South Korea, Japan, Maybe parts of China, parts of Russia.
Not just from NK strikes, but also fallout
Only if they're ground bursts
Even at altitude...The concussive expansion, the heat, lack of humidity
still causes ground debris to rise..mingle with radiation particulate
and to spread to the 4 corners of the earth by the prevailing winds.
True that a full ground burst is more contaminating.... But remember the
Strontium 90 scare of the 1950's? Well sir, it is almost 3 times that
right now.
Nope. All pretty much wrong. And practically all fallout is 'local'
to the detonation site. Air bursts above 2,000 feet or so will
produce negligible fallout with typical US weapons (350 kt or so).
Even for a ground burst typically prevailing winds will take any
fallout out to see to the southeast.
--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the
truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
-- Thomas Jefferson
PaxPerPoten
2017-12-05 21:33:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by Vincent
Post by Byker
Post by Kerryn Offord
South Korea, Japan, Maybe parts of China, parts of Russia.
Not just from NK strikes, but also fallout
Only if they're ground bursts
Even at altitude...The concussive expansion, the heat, lack of humidity
still causes ground debris to rise..mingle with radiation particulate
and to spread to the 4 corners of the earth by the prevailing winds.
True that a full ground burst is more contaminating.... But remember the
Strontium 90 scare of the 1950's? Well sir, it is almost 3 times that
right now.
Nope. All pretty much wrong. And practically all fallout is 'local'
to the detonation site. Air bursts above 2,000 feet or so will
produce negligible fallout with typical US weapons (350 kt or so).
Even for a ground burst typically prevailing winds will take any
fallout out to see to the southeast.
We measured significant radiation from airbursts 600 miles from Bikini
way back when, Fred. Also a lot of vapor particulate. No matter who is
correct here...A Nuclear detonation anywhere at any level is not in
anybodies best interest. Not to mention that we lost all Electromagnetic
communications for a few hours. Not even VHF/SHF between ships was
functional for a while. Now Strontium 90 infected milk cows as far away
as Wisconsin, Minnesota, the Dakotas and several other states. It sure
didn't get there by UPS truck.
--
It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard
the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all
ages who mean to govern well, but *They mean to govern*. They promise to
be good masters, *but they mean to be masters*. Daniel Webster
george152
2017-12-06 00:13:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by PaxPerPoten
We measured significant radiation from airbursts 600 miles from Bikini
way back when, Fred. Also a lot of vapor particulate. No matter who is
correct here...A Nuclear detonation anywhere at any level is not in
anybodies best interest. Not to mention that we lost all Electromagnetic
communications for a few hours. Not even VHF/SHF between ships was
functional for a while. Now Strontium 90 infected milk cows as far away
as Wisconsin, Minnesota, the Dakotas and several other states. It sure
didn't get there by UPS truck.
I should include our little trips to Operation Grappel as weather picket
and somewhat closer to the explosions than was good for the crew who
were stood to on deck at the time


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Mr. B1ack
2017-12-06 03:07:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by george152
Post by PaxPerPoten
We measured significant radiation from airbursts 600 miles from Bikini
way back when, Fred. Also a lot of vapor particulate. No matter who is
correct here...A Nuclear detonation anywhere at any level is not in
anybodies best interest. Not to mention that we lost all Electromagnetic
communications for a few hours. Not even VHF/SHF between ships was
functional for a while. Now Strontium 90 infected milk cows as far away
as Wisconsin, Minnesota, the Dakotas and several other states. It sure
didn't get there by UPS truck.
I should include our little trips to Operation Grappel as weather picket
and somewhat closer to the explosions than was good for the crew who
were stood to on deck at the time
I've argued with people here about this issue already.

They imagine that air-bursts produce little or no fallout.

They produce *less* fallout, but it's still a lot.

Also, if you're going after military targets buried under
mountains or even scattered across the countryside
your "air bursts" can't be THAT high in the air or they'll
do little damage below. This means they WILL suck
up a fair amount of junk. For the hardened targets
ground-level blasts would be needed.

Which means no 'clean' nukewar against N.Korea.
It's wedged in there amongst a bunch of countries
we do NOT wanna scatter fallout all over. Other
tactics will be required. NK isn't even a good
candidate for nuclear attack- so many of its
military assets are either buried or mobile, there
are no good targets. The only big "city" is just
a fake, world's largest Potempkin village.

We need some REALLY fast missiles that can
sea or air launched that can follow an ICBM
up into the sky and hit it in the ass - reliably.
If we don't have those, well, we have a big
problem .....

OR ... we or China can just take out Kim and
his inner circle of syncophants. It's a very very
narrow-based government there, it'd collapse
instantly. Then we can negotiate with the
remaining generals. Better if China does it,
makes NK a de-facto Chinese colony.
Fred J. McCall
2017-12-06 08:45:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mr. B1ack
I've argued with people here about this issue already.
Yes, you've been wrong before.
Post by Mr. B1ack
They imagine that air-bursts produce little or no fallout.
The word your looking for is 'know' vice "imagine".
Post by Mr. B1ack
They produce *less* fallout, but it's still a lot.
Wrong. Modern weapons are primarily fusion powered. Above a certain
height (around 2,000 feet for typical US weapons) the only radioactive
fallout comes from the bomb itself and the amount of that is TINY. It
doesn't matter what gets 'sucked up', since none of that material is
activated and is therefore non-radioactive.
Post by Mr. B1ack
Also, if you're going after military targets buried under
mountains or even scattered across the countryside
your "air bursts" can't be THAT high in the air or they'll
do little damage below. This means they WILL suck
up a fair amount of junk. For the hardened targets
ground-level blasts would be needed.
Ground bursts of a typical US weapon (300 kt or so) can produce
radioactive 'plumes' of fallout to the downwind side of the blast that
extend between 100 and 200 miles. The last third of that plum is only
1 rad/hr exposure. Another third of the plume is only 10 rads/hr. Go
to smaller yields that would be used for surface bursts and the plume
is reduced to only being 50-60 miles long. North Korean prevailing
winds blow from northwest to southeast, which means that any such
fallout goes out to sea before it crosses out of North Korea.
Post by Mr. B1ack
Which means no 'clean' nukewar against N.Korea.
It's wedged in there amongst a bunch of countries
we do NOT wanna scatter fallout all over.
And so we won't because the winds won't carry it there.
Post by Mr. B1ack
Other
tactics will be required. NK isn't even a good
candidate for nuclear attack- so many of its
military assets are either buried or mobile, there
are no good targets. The only big "city" is just
a fake, world's largest Potempkin village.
What you mean is that North Korea is not a good target for a
COUNTERVALUE strike. Counterforce strikes and tactical strikes on
installations and troops in the field work fine.
Post by Mr. B1ack
We need some REALLY fast missiles that can
sea or air launched that can follow an ICBM
up into the sky and hit it in the ass - reliably.
If we don't have those, well, we have a big
problem .....
We have a big problem, then, according to you.
Post by Mr. B1ack
OR ... we or China can just take out Kim and
his inner circle of syncophants. It's a very very
narrow-based government there, it'd collapse
instantly. Then we can negotiate with the
remaining generals. Better if China does it,
makes NK a de-facto Chinese colony.
That's about the craziest thing to try. What if instead of collapsing
some local general with control of nukes fires them off (which is
likely what would happen)?
--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the
truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
-- Thomas Jefferson
Mr. B1ack
2017-12-06 15:00:58 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 06 Dec 2017 01:45:31 -0700, Fred J. McCall
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by Mr. B1ack
I've argued with people here about this issue already.
Yes, you've been wrong before.
Post by Mr. B1ack
They imagine that air-bursts produce little or no fallout.
The word your looking for is 'know' vice "imagine".
Post by Mr. B1ack
They produce *less* fallout, but it's still a lot.
Wrong. Modern weapons are primarily fusion powered. Above a certain
height (around 2,000 feet for typical US weapons) the only radioactive
fallout comes from the bomb itself and the amount of that is TINY. It
doesn't matter what gets 'sucked up', since none of that material is
activated and is therefore non-radioactive.
Post by Mr. B1ack
Also, if you're going after military targets buried under
mountains or even scattered across the countryside
your "air bursts" can't be THAT high in the air or they'll
do little damage below. This means they WILL suck
up a fair amount of junk. For the hardened targets
ground-level blasts would be needed.
Ground bursts of a typical US weapon (300 kt or so) can produce
radioactive 'plumes' of fallout to the downwind side of the blast that
extend between 100 and 200 miles. The last third of that plum is only
1 rad/hr exposure. Another third of the plume is only 10 rads/hr. Go
to smaller yields that would be used for surface bursts and the plume
is reduced to only being 50-60 miles long. North Korean prevailing
winds blow from northwest to southeast, which means that any such
fallout goes out to sea before it crosses out of North Korea.
Post by Mr. B1ack
Which means no 'clean' nukewar against N.Korea.
It's wedged in there amongst a bunch of countries
we do NOT wanna scatter fallout all over.
And so we won't because the winds won't carry it there.
So, it'd be OK if the Russians nuked Tijuana because
only "a little" fallout would carry over to the US side of
the border ?

The prevailing low-level winds would carry the shit
straight to Japan ... and the high-level winds would
blow it all over Vladivostok. The more nukes you
used the worse the problem - but NEITHER of those
countries wants a single millirad of it.

And, thanks to the schemes of Obama and the EU,
we are NOT on very good terms with Russia anymore.
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by Mr. B1ack
Other
tactics will be required. NK isn't even a good
candidate for nuclear attack- so many of its
military assets are either buried or mobile, there
are no good targets. The only big "city" is just
a fake, world's largest Potempkin village.
What you mean is that North Korea is not a good target for a
COUNTERVALUE strike. Counterforce strikes and tactical strikes on
installations and troops in the field work fine.
Post by Mr. B1ack
We need some REALLY fast missiles that can
sea or air launched that can follow an ICBM
up into the sky and hit it in the ass - reliably.
If we don't have those, well, we have a big
problem .....
We have a big problem, then, according to you.
Post by Mr. B1ack
OR ... we or China can just take out Kim and
his inner circle of syncophants. It's a very very
narrow-based government there, it'd collapse
instantly. Then we can negotiate with the
remaining generals. Better if China does it,
makes NK a de-facto Chinese colony.
That's about the craziest thing to try. What if instead of collapsing
some local general with control of nukes fires them off (which is
likely what would happen)?
I don't think ANYBODY there, except Kim, gets to
decide much of ANYTHING. Those who get 'uppity'
get shot.

You're just itching to use some nukes, aren't you ?
Seek psychological council.
Fred J. McCall
2017-12-06 21:07:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mr. B1ack
On Wed, 06 Dec 2017 01:45:31 -0700, Fred J. McCall
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by Mr. B1ack
I've argued with people here about this issue already.
Yes, you've been wrong before.
Post by Mr. B1ack
They imagine that air-bursts produce little or no fallout.
The word your looking for is 'know' vice "imagine".
Post by Mr. B1ack
They produce *less* fallout, but it's still a lot.
Wrong. Modern weapons are primarily fusion powered. Above a certain
height (around 2,000 feet for typical US weapons) the only radioactive
fallout comes from the bomb itself and the amount of that is TINY. It
doesn't matter what gets 'sucked up', since none of that material is
activated and is therefore non-radioactive.
Post by Mr. B1ack
Also, if you're going after military targets buried under
mountains or even scattered across the countryside
your "air bursts" can't be THAT high in the air or they'll
do little damage below. This means they WILL suck
up a fair amount of junk. For the hardened targets
ground-level blasts would be needed.
Ground bursts of a typical US weapon (300 kt or so) can produce
radioactive 'plumes' of fallout to the downwind side of the blast that
extend between 100 and 200 miles. The last third of that plum is only
1 rad/hr exposure. Another third of the plume is only 10 rads/hr. Go
to smaller yields that would be used for surface bursts and the plume
is reduced to only being 50-60 miles long. North Korean prevailing
winds blow from northwest to southeast, which means that any such
fallout goes out to sea before it crosses out of North Korea.
Post by Mr. B1ack
Which means no 'clean' nukewar against N.Korea.
It's wedged in there amongst a bunch of countries
we do NOT wanna scatter fallout all over.
And so we won't because the winds won't carry it there.
So, it'd be OK if the Russians nuked Tijuana because
only "a little" fallout would carry over to the US side of
the border ?
Reductio ad absurdem. No, it wouldn't be OK because Mexico are our
friends. You also need to look at a map and realize just how close
Tijuana is to Imperial Beach. Nobody is talking about dropping nukes
within 5 miles of a Chinese city.
Post by Mr. B1ack
The prevailing low-level winds would carry the shit
straight to Japan ...
Wrong. Japan is too far away to get appreciable fallout even from
large surface bursts near the DMZ (which is pretty much worst case for
Japan).
Post by Mr. B1ack
,,, and the high-level winds would
blow it all over Vladivostok. The more nukes you
used the worse the problem - but NEITHER of those
countries wants a single millirad of it.
You really don't understand this stuff very well, do you? First, for
an air burst there is a single source of fallout; the materials in the
bomb itself. Regardless of how much stuff gets sucked up into the
base surge, NONE OF THAT IS RADIOACTIVE. The stuff from the bomb will
go up high as very fine particles. It will disperse (and dilute) in
the general atmosphere and only come down very slowly. By the time it
comes down, a lot of the nastier stuff (from a human health
perspective) has decayed down to almost nothing.

So now let's consider a surface burst. You get a lot of crap from the
ground that gets activated and becomes radioactive. However, that
stuff doesn't carry very far because it's larger particles. It also
doesn't last very long (relatively speaking) or loft very high (in a
relative sense). Japan is too far away even if the winds carried it
there.

You're worried about millirads? Avoid bananas, granite, and air.
Post by Mr. B1ack
And, thanks to the schemes of Obama and the EU,
we are NOT on very good terms with Russia anymore.
Paranoid much?
Post by Mr. B1ack
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by Mr. B1ack
Other
tactics will be required. NK isn't even a good
candidate for nuclear attack- so many of its
military assets are either buried or mobile, there
are no good targets. The only big "city" is just
a fake, world's largest Potempkin village.
What you mean is that North Korea is not a good target for a
COUNTERVALUE strike. Counterforce strikes and tactical strikes on
installations and troops in the field work fine.
Post by Mr. B1ack
We need some REALLY fast missiles that can
sea or air launched that can follow an ICBM
up into the sky and hit it in the ass - reliably.
If we don't have those, well, we have a big
problem .....
We have a big problem, then, according to you.
Post by Mr. B1ack
OR ... we or China can just take out Kim and
his inner circle of syncophants. It's a very very
narrow-based government there, it'd collapse
instantly. Then we can negotiate with the
remaining generals. Better if China does it,
makes NK a de-facto Chinese colony.
That's about the craziest thing to try. What if instead of collapsing
some local general with control of nukes fires them off (which is
likely what would happen)?
I don't think ANYBODY there, except Kim, gets to
decide much of ANYTHING. Those who get 'uppity'
get shot.
Hard for him to shoot people after he's dead. Kill him and his inner
circle and you're going to get a bunch of people competing (in all the
ugliest ways possible) for power and you can bet people controlling
nuclear weapons have orders to shoot them off if something like that
happens. Would they? Impossible to know for sure, but I'd bet yes.
Post by Mr. B1ack
You're just itching to use some nukes, aren't you ?
Seek psychological council.
Not at all. I just think it's stupid to make a specious case against
them. Seek to alleviate your ignorance.
--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the
truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
-- Thomas Jefferson
PaxPerPoten
2017-12-06 23:49:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fred J. McCall
Wrong. Modern weapons are primarily fusion powered. Above a certain
height (around 2,000 feet for typical US weapons) the only radioactive
fallout comes from the bomb itself and the amount of that is TINY. It
doesn't matter what gets 'sucked up', since none of that material is
activated and is therefore non-radioactive.
Sorry Fred...But you have been drinking the Government Cool-aid'
Anything you suck up into the Nuclear vortex will be contaminated.
That was proven by the following lists of actual occurrences.

http://tinyurl.com/ycfpd3w3

Also in 1949 our Military and Government made the decision that a few
hundred thousand Americans as peripheral damage to our nuclear strike on
another Nation was totally acceptable. That outlook has NOT changed!
--
It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard
the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all
ages who mean to govern well, but *They mean to govern*. They promise to
be good masters, *but they mean to be masters*. Daniel Webster
Fred J. McCall
2017-12-07 03:21:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Wrong. Modern weapons are primarily fusion powered. Above a certain
height (around 2,000 feet for typical US weapons) the only radioactive
fallout comes from the bomb itself and the amount of that is TINY. It
doesn't matter what gets 'sucked up', since none of that material is
activated and is therefore non-radioactive.
Sorry Fred...But you have been drinking the Government Cool-aid'
Anything you suck up into the Nuclear vortex will be contaminated.
Wrong. If it's not in the fireball there's nothing to activate it.
Post by PaxPerPoten
That was proven by the following lists of actual occurrences.
http://tinyurl.com/ycfpd3w3
Virtually all surface blasts on towers, so nothing to support your
claim with regard to air bursts.
Post by PaxPerPoten
Also in 1949 our Military and Government made the decision that a few
hundred thousand Americans as peripheral damage to our nuclear strike on
another Nation was totally acceptable. That outlook has NOT changed!
We were attacking Mexico? Cite for this claim?
--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the
truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
-- Thomas Jefferson
PaxPerPoten
2017-12-08 02:51:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Wrong. Modern weapons are primarily fusion powered. Above a certain
height (around 2,000 feet for typical US weapons) the only radioactive
fallout comes from the bomb itself and the amount of that is TINY. It
doesn't matter what gets 'sucked up', since none of that material is
activated and is therefore non-radioactive.
Sorry Fred...But you have been drinking the Government Cool-aid'
Anything you suck up into the Nuclear vortex will be contaminated.
Wrong. If it's not in the fireball there's nothing to activate it.
Post by PaxPerPoten
That was proven by the following lists of actual occurrences.
http://tinyurl.com/ycfpd3w3
Virtually all surface blasts on towers, so nothing to support your
claim with regard to air bursts.
Post by PaxPerPoten
Also in 1949 our Military and Government made the decision that a few
hundred thousand Americans as peripheral damage to our nuclear strike on
another Nation was totally acceptable. That outlook has NOT changed!
We were attacking Mexico? Cite for this claim?
I didn't realize that you are a Mexican national?
That explains your luke warm comments on the American Military.
--
It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard
the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all
ages who mean to govern well, but *They mean to govern*. They promise to
be good masters, *but they mean to be masters*. Daniel Webster
Fred J. McCall
2017-12-08 04:59:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Wrong. Modern weapons are primarily fusion powered. Above a certain
height (around 2,000 feet for typical US weapons) the only radioactive
fallout comes from the bomb itself and the amount of that is TINY. It
doesn't matter what gets 'sucked up', since none of that material is
activated and is therefore non-radioactive.
Sorry Fred...But you have been drinking the Government Cool-aid'
Anything you suck up into the Nuclear vortex will be contaminated.
Wrong. If it's not in the fireball there's nothing to activate it.
Post by PaxPerPoten
That was proven by the following lists of actual occurrences.
http://tinyurl.com/ycfpd3w3
Virtually all surface blasts on towers, so nothing to support your
claim with regard to air bursts.
Post by PaxPerPoten
Also in 1949 our Military and Government made the decision that a few
hundred thousand Americans as peripheral damage to our nuclear strike on
another Nation was totally acceptable. That outlook has NOT changed!
We were attacking Mexico? Cite for this claim?
I didn't realize that you are a Mexican national?
That explains your luke warm comments on the American Military.
English obviously isn't your first language. YOU said "in 1949 our
Military and Government made the decision that a few hundred thousand
Americans as peripheral damage to our nuclear strike on another Nation
was totally acceptable" (and I note you've failed to provide the
requested cite for that claim, so the claim is bullshit). The only
way that would be a concern is if we were dropping nukes within a few
hundred miles of the US border, which leads to my comment. Now go
look at a map, phuquewit.
--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn
PaxPerPoten
2017-12-09 02:05:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Wrong. Modern weapons are primarily fusion powered. Above a certain
height (around 2,000 feet for typical US weapons) the only radioactive
fallout comes from the bomb itself and the amount of that is TINY. It
doesn't matter what gets 'sucked up', since none of that material is
activated and is therefore non-radioactive.
Sorry Fred...But you have been drinking the Government Cool-aid'
Anything you suck up into the Nuclear vortex will be contaminated.
Wrong. If it's not in the fireball there's nothing to activate it.
Post by PaxPerPoten
That was proven by the following lists of actual occurrences.
http://tinyurl.com/ycfpd3w3
Virtually all surface blasts on towers, so nothing to support your
claim with regard to air bursts.
Post by PaxPerPoten
Also in 1949 our Military and Government made the decision that a few
hundred thousand Americans as peripheral damage to our nuclear strike on
another Nation was totally acceptable. That outlook has NOT changed!
We were attacking Mexico? Cite for this claim?
I didn't realize that you are a Mexican national?
That explains your luke warm comments on the American Military.
English obviously isn't your first language. YOU said "in 1949 our
Military and Government made the decision that a few hundred thousand
Americans as peripheral damage to our nuclear strike on another Nation
was totally acceptable" (and I note you've failed to provide the
requested cite for that claim, so the claim is bullshit). The only
way that would be a concern is if we were dropping nukes within a few
hundred miles of the US border, which leads to my comment. Now go
look at a map, phuquewit.
I guess that in your Fairy world No American ever leaves the Homeland to
travel to other countries. You are aware that when Hiroshima was Nuked,
that hundreds and maybe thousands of American and Allied prisoners were
present there? The decision to accept peripheral losses of Americans was
in Answer the General Curtis Le May's plans for protecting America. The
Berlin Airlift was a good example of possible peripheral damage if a
nuclear war broke out over Germany. We had thousands of American
personal there. Military and Civilian. Jonthy is rubbing off on you and
like him...Common sense evades you.
--
It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard
the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all
ages who mean to govern well, but *They mean to govern*. They promise to
be good masters, *but they mean to be masters*. Daniel Webster
Fred J. McCall
2017-12-09 07:42:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Wrong. Modern weapons are primarily fusion powered. Above a certain
height (around 2,000 feet for typical US weapons) the only radioactive
fallout comes from the bomb itself and the amount of that is TINY. It
doesn't matter what gets 'sucked up', since none of that material is
activated and is therefore non-radioactive.
Sorry Fred...But you have been drinking the Government Cool-aid'
Anything you suck up into the Nuclear vortex will be contaminated.
Wrong. If it's not in the fireball there's nothing to activate it.
Post by PaxPerPoten
That was proven by the following lists of actual occurrences.
http://tinyurl.com/ycfpd3w3
Virtually all surface blasts on towers, so nothing to support your
claim with regard to air bursts.
Post by PaxPerPoten
Also in 1949 our Military and Government made the decision that a few
hundred thousand Americans as peripheral damage to our nuclear strike on
another Nation was totally acceptable. That outlook has NOT changed!
We were attacking Mexico? Cite for this claim?
I didn't realize that you are a Mexican national?
That explains your luke warm comments on the American Military.
English obviously isn't your first language. YOU said "in 1949 our
Military and Government made the decision that a few hundred thousand
Americans as peripheral damage to our nuclear strike on another Nation
was totally acceptable" (and I note you've failed to provide the
requested cite for that claim, so the claim is bullshit). The only
way that would be a concern is if we were dropping nukes within a few
hundred miles of the US border, which leads to my comment. Now go
look at a map, phuquewit.
I guess that in your Fairy world No American ever leaves the Homeland to
travel to other countries.
You think there will be "a few hundred thousand" tourists in a country
we're so much at war with that we start using nukes? I'm sorry you
live in Hell.
Post by PaxPerPoten
You are aware that when Hiroshima was Nuked,
that hundreds and maybe thousands of American and Allied prisoners were
present there? The decision to accept peripheral losses of Americans was
in Answer the General Curtis Le May's plans for protecting America.
Long precedent. You are aware that there were a lot of US POWs in
Dresden, right? Hell, Kurt Vonnegut was one of them and even wrote a
book based on it (Slaughterhouse Five).
Post by PaxPerPoten
The
Berlin Airlift was a good example of possible peripheral damage if a
nuclear war broke out over Germany. We had thousands of American
personal there.
Germany would have been tactical nukes. The joke at the time was that
German towns were 1.5 kilotons apart. You think anything changes with
conventional bombing? Dead is dead.
Post by PaxPerPoten
Military and Civilian. Jonthy is rubbing off on you and
like him...Common sense evades you.
You've always been a loony dipshit and that probably won't change
until you go through a course of penicillin.
--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
only stupid."
-- Heinrich Heine
PaxPerPoten
2017-12-09 23:10:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Wrong. Modern weapons are primarily fusion powered. Above a certain
height (around 2,000 feet for typical US weapons) the only radioactive
fallout comes from the bomb itself and the amount of that is TINY. It
doesn't matter what gets 'sucked up', since none of that material is
activated and is therefore non-radioactive.
Sorry Fred...But you have been drinking the Government Cool-aid'
Anything you suck up into the Nuclear vortex will be contaminated.
Wrong. If it's not in the fireball there's nothing to activate it.
Post by PaxPerPoten
That was proven by the following lists of actual occurrences.
http://tinyurl.com/ycfpd3w3
Virtually all surface blasts on towers, so nothing to support your
claim with regard to air bursts.
Post by PaxPerPoten
Also in 1949 our Military and Government made the decision that a few
hundred thousand Americans as peripheral damage to our nuclear strike on
another Nation was totally acceptable. That outlook has NOT changed!
We were attacking Mexico? Cite for this claim?
I didn't realize that you are a Mexican national?
That explains your luke warm comments on the American Military.
English obviously isn't your first language. YOU said "in 1949 our
Military and Government made the decision that a few hundred thousand
Americans as peripheral damage to our nuclear strike on another Nation
was totally acceptable" (and I note you've failed to provide the
requested cite for that claim, so the claim is bullshit). The only
way that would be a concern is if we were dropping nukes within a few
hundred miles of the US border, which leads to my comment. Now go
look at a map, phuquewit.
I guess that in your Fairy world No American ever leaves the Homeland to
travel to other countries.
You think there will be "a few hundred thousand" tourists in a country
we're so much at war with that we start using nukes? I'm sorry you
live in Hell.
Post by PaxPerPoten
You are aware that when Hiroshima was Nuked,
that hundreds and maybe thousands of American and Allied prisoners were
present there? The decision to accept peripheral losses of Americans was
in Answer the General Curtis Le May's plans for protecting America.
Long precedent. You are aware that there were a lot of US POWs in
Dresden, right? Hell, Kurt Vonnegut was one of them and even wrote a
book based on it (Slaughterhouse Five).
Post by PaxPerPoten
The
Berlin Airlift was a good example of possible peripheral damage if a
nuclear war broke out over Germany. We had thousands of American
personal there.
Germany would have been tactical nukes. The joke at the time was that
German towns were 1.5 kilotons apart. You think anything changes with
conventional bombing? Dead is dead.
Post by PaxPerPoten
Military and Civilian. Jonthy is rubbing off on you and
like him...Common sense evades you.
You've always been a loony dipshit and that probably won't change
until you go through a course of penicillin.
Better check your lithium drip...It must have run out.
--
It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard
the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all
ages who mean to govern well, but *They mean to govern*. They promise to
be good masters, *but they mean to be masters*. Daniel Webster
Fred J. McCall
2017-12-10 02:30:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Wrong. Modern weapons are primarily fusion powered. Above a certain
height (around 2,000 feet for typical US weapons) the only radioactive
fallout comes from the bomb itself and the amount of that is TINY. It
doesn't matter what gets 'sucked up', since none of that material is
activated and is therefore non-radioactive.
Sorry Fred...But you have been drinking the Government Cool-aid'
Anything you suck up into the Nuclear vortex will be contaminated.
Wrong. If it's not in the fireball there's nothing to activate it.
Post by PaxPerPoten
That was proven by the following lists of actual occurrences.
http://tinyurl.com/ycfpd3w3
Virtually all surface blasts on towers, so nothing to support your
claim with regard to air bursts.
Post by PaxPerPoten
Also in 1949 our Military and Government made the decision that a few
hundred thousand Americans as peripheral damage to our nuclear strike on
another Nation was totally acceptable. That outlook has NOT changed!
We were attacking Mexico? Cite for this claim?
I didn't realize that you are a Mexican national?
That explains your luke warm comments on the American Military.
English obviously isn't your first language. YOU said "in 1949 our
Military and Government made the decision that a few hundred thousand
Americans as peripheral damage to our nuclear strike on another Nation
was totally acceptable" (and I note you've failed to provide the
requested cite for that claim, so the claim is bullshit). The only
way that would be a concern is if we were dropping nukes within a few
hundred miles of the US border, which leads to my comment. Now go
look at a map, phuquewit.
I guess that in your Fairy world No American ever leaves the Homeland to
travel to other countries.
You think there will be "a few hundred thousand" tourists in a country
we're so much at war with that we start using nukes? I'm sorry you
live in Hell.
Post by PaxPerPoten
You are aware that when Hiroshima was Nuked,
that hundreds and maybe thousands of American and Allied prisoners were
present there? The decision to accept peripheral losses of Americans was
in Answer the General Curtis Le May's plans for protecting America.
Long precedent. You are aware that there were a lot of US POWs in
Dresden, right? Hell, Kurt Vonnegut was one of them and even wrote a
book based on it (Slaughterhouse Five).
Post by PaxPerPoten
The
Berlin Airlift was a good example of possible peripheral damage if a
nuclear war broke out over Germany. We had thousands of American
personal there.
Germany would have been tactical nukes. The joke at the time was that
German towns were 1.5 kilotons apart. You think anything changes with
conventional bombing? Dead is dead.
Post by PaxPerPoten
Military and Civilian. Jonthy is rubbing off on you and
like him...Common sense evades you.
You've always been a loony dipshit and that probably won't change
until you go through a course of penicillin.
Better check your lithium drip...It must have run out.
Better check your penile drip...
--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
only stupid."
-- Heinrich Heine
PaxPerPoten
2017-12-10 10:24:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Wrong. Modern weapons are primarily fusion powered. Above a certain
height (around 2,000 feet for typical US weapons) the only radioactive
fallout comes from the bomb itself and the amount of that is TINY. It
doesn't matter what gets 'sucked up', since none of that material is
activated and is therefore non-radioactive.
Sorry Fred...But you have been drinking the Government Cool-aid'
Anything you suck up into the Nuclear vortex will be contaminated.
Wrong. If it's not in the fireball there's nothing to activate it.
Post by PaxPerPoten
That was proven by the following lists of actual occurrences.
http://tinyurl.com/ycfpd3w3
Virtually all surface blasts on towers, so nothing to support your
claim with regard to air bursts.
Post by PaxPerPoten
Also in 1949 our Military and Government made the decision that a few
hundred thousand Americans as peripheral damage to our nuclear strike on
another Nation was totally acceptable. That outlook has NOT changed!
We were attacking Mexico? Cite for this claim?
I didn't realize that you are a Mexican national?
That explains your luke warm comments on the American Military.
English obviously isn't your first language. YOU said "in 1949 our
Military and Government made the decision that a few hundred thousand
Americans as peripheral damage to our nuclear strike on another Nation
was totally acceptable" (and I note you've failed to provide the
requested cite for that claim, so the claim is bullshit). The only
way that would be a concern is if we were dropping nukes within a few
hundred miles of the US border, which leads to my comment. Now go
look at a map, phuquewit.
I guess that in your Fairy world No American ever leaves the Homeland to
travel to other countries.
You think there will be "a few hundred thousand" tourists in a country
we're so much at war with that we start using nukes? I'm sorry you
live in Hell.
Post by PaxPerPoten
You are aware that when Hiroshima was Nuked,
that hundreds and maybe thousands of American and Allied prisoners were
present there? The decision to accept peripheral losses of Americans was
in Answer the General Curtis Le May's plans for protecting America.
Long precedent. You are aware that there were a lot of US POWs in
Dresden, right? Hell, Kurt Vonnegut was one of them and even wrote a
book based on it (Slaughterhouse Five).
Post by PaxPerPoten
The
Berlin Airlift was a good example of possible peripheral damage if a
nuclear war broke out over Germany. We had thousands of American
personal there.
Germany would have been tactical nukes. The joke at the time was that
German towns were 1.5 kilotons apart. You think anything changes with
conventional bombing? Dead is dead.
Post by PaxPerPoten
Military and Civilian. Jonthy is rubbing off on you and
like him...Common sense evades you.
You've always been a loony dipshit and that probably won't change
until you go through a course of penicillin.
Better check your lithium drip...It must have run out.
Better check your penile drip...
Why the sudden interest in my Penis, Freddie?
--
It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard
the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all
ages who mean to govern well, but *They mean to govern*. They promise to
be good masters, *but they mean to be masters*. Daniel Webster
Fred J. McCall
2017-12-10 19:35:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Wrong. Modern weapons are primarily fusion powered. Above a certain
height (around 2,000 feet for typical US weapons) the only radioactive
fallout comes from the bomb itself and the amount of that is TINY. It
doesn't matter what gets 'sucked up', since none of that material is
activated and is therefore non-radioactive.
Sorry Fred...But you have been drinking the Government Cool-aid'
Anything you suck up into the Nuclear vortex will be contaminated.
Wrong. If it's not in the fireball there's nothing to activate it.
Post by PaxPerPoten
That was proven by the following lists of actual occurrences.
http://tinyurl.com/ycfpd3w3
Virtually all surface blasts on towers, so nothing to support your
claim with regard to air bursts.
Post by PaxPerPoten
Also in 1949 our Military and Government made the decision that a few
hundred thousand Americans as peripheral damage to our nuclear strike on
another Nation was totally acceptable. That outlook has NOT changed!
We were attacking Mexico? Cite for this claim?
I didn't realize that you are a Mexican national?
That explains your luke warm comments on the American Military.
English obviously isn't your first language. YOU said "in 1949 our
Military and Government made the decision that a few hundred thousand
Americans as peripheral damage to our nuclear strike on another Nation
was totally acceptable" (and I note you've failed to provide the
requested cite for that claim, so the claim is bullshit). The only
way that would be a concern is if we were dropping nukes within a few
hundred miles of the US border, which leads to my comment. Now go
look at a map, phuquewit.
I guess that in your Fairy world No American ever leaves the Homeland to
travel to other countries.
You think there will be "a few hundred thousand" tourists in a country
we're so much at war with that we start using nukes? I'm sorry you
live in Hell.
Post by PaxPerPoten
You are aware that when Hiroshima was Nuked,
that hundreds and maybe thousands of American and Allied prisoners were
present there? The decision to accept peripheral losses of Americans was
in Answer the General Curtis Le May's plans for protecting America.
Long precedent. You are aware that there were a lot of US POWs in
Dresden, right? Hell, Kurt Vonnegut was one of them and even wrote a
book based on it (Slaughterhouse Five).
Post by PaxPerPoten
The
Berlin Airlift was a good example of possible peripheral damage if a
nuclear war broke out over Germany. We had thousands of American
personal there.
Germany would have been tactical nukes. The joke at the time was that
German towns were 1.5 kilotons apart. You think anything changes with
conventional bombing? Dead is dead.
Post by PaxPerPoten
Military and Civilian. Jonthy is rubbing off on you and
like him...Common sense evades you.
You've always been a loony dipshit and that probably won't change
until you go through a course of penicillin.
Better check your lithium drip...It must have run out.
Better check your penile drip...
Why the sudden interest in my Penis, Freddie?
What makes you think anyone is interested in that disease ridden
thing, PoxPerPootin?
--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
only stupid."
-- Heinrich Heine
PaxPerPoten
2017-12-11 07:51:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Wrong. Modern weapons are primarily fusion powered. Above a certain
height (around 2,000 feet for typical US weapons) the only radioactive
fallout comes from the bomb itself and the amount of that is TINY. It
doesn't matter what gets 'sucked up', since none of that material is
activated and is therefore non-radioactive.
Sorry Fred...But you have been drinking the Government Cool-aid'
Anything you suck up into the Nuclear vortex will be contaminated.
Wrong. If it's not in the fireball there's nothing to activate it.
Post by PaxPerPoten
That was proven by the following lists of actual occurrences.
http://tinyurl.com/ycfpd3w3
Virtually all surface blasts on towers, so nothing to support your
claim with regard to air bursts.
Post by PaxPerPoten
Also in 1949 our Military and Government made the decision that a few
hundred thousand Americans as peripheral damage to our nuclear strike on
another Nation was totally acceptable. That outlook has NOT changed!
We were attacking Mexico? Cite for this claim?
I didn't realize that you are a Mexican national?
That explains your luke warm comments on the American Military.
English obviously isn't your first language. YOU said "in 1949 our
Military and Government made the decision that a few hundred thousand
Americans as peripheral damage to our nuclear strike on another Nation
was totally acceptable" (and I note you've failed to provide the
requested cite for that claim, so the claim is bullshit). The only
way that would be a concern is if we were dropping nukes within a few
hundred miles of the US border, which leads to my comment. Now go
look at a map, phuquewit.
I guess that in your Fairy world No American ever leaves the Homeland to
travel to other countries.
You think there will be "a few hundred thousand" tourists in a country
we're so much at war with that we start using nukes? I'm sorry you
live in Hell.
Post by PaxPerPoten
You are aware that when Hiroshima was Nuked,
that hundreds and maybe thousands of American and Allied prisoners were
present there? The decision to accept peripheral losses of Americans was
in Answer the General Curtis Le May's plans for protecting America.
Long precedent. You are aware that there were a lot of US POWs in
Dresden, right? Hell, Kurt Vonnegut was one of them and even wrote a
book based on it (Slaughterhouse Five).
Post by PaxPerPoten
The
Berlin Airlift was a good example of possible peripheral damage if a
nuclear war broke out over Germany. We had thousands of American
personal there.
Germany would have been tactical nukes. The joke at the time was that
German towns were 1.5 kilotons apart. You think anything changes with
conventional bombing? Dead is dead.
Post by PaxPerPoten
Military and Civilian. Jonthy is rubbing off on you and
like him...Common sense evades you.
You've always been a loony dipshit and that probably won't change
until you go through a course of penicillin.
Better check your lithium drip...It must have run out.
Better check your penile drip...
Why the sudden interest in my Penis, Freddie?
What makes you think anyone is interested in that disease ridden
thing, PoxPerPootin?
Apparently you. You are the interest party ..And no thanks.. Its
reserved for the better half.
--
It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard
the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all
ages who mean to govern well, but *They mean to govern*. They promise to
be good masters, *but they mean to be masters*. Daniel Webster
Fred J. McCall
2017-12-11 17:41:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Wrong. Modern weapons are primarily fusion powered. Above a certain
height (around 2,000 feet for typical US weapons) the only radioactive
fallout comes from the bomb itself and the amount of that is TINY. It
doesn't matter what gets 'sucked up', since none of that material is
activated and is therefore non-radioactive.
Sorry Fred...But you have been drinking the Government Cool-aid'
Anything you suck up into the Nuclear vortex will be contaminated.
Wrong. If it's not in the fireball there's nothing to activate it.
Post by PaxPerPoten
That was proven by the following lists of actual occurrences.
http://tinyurl.com/ycfpd3w3
Virtually all surface blasts on towers, so nothing to support your
claim with regard to air bursts.
Post by PaxPerPoten
Also in 1949 our Military and Government made the decision that a few
hundred thousand Americans as peripheral damage to our nuclear strike on
another Nation was totally acceptable. That outlook has NOT changed!
We were attacking Mexico? Cite for this claim?
I didn't realize that you are a Mexican national?
That explains your luke warm comments on the American Military.
English obviously isn't your first language. YOU said "in 1949 our
Military and Government made the decision that a few hundred thousand
Americans as peripheral damage to our nuclear strike on another Nation
was totally acceptable" (and I note you've failed to provide the
requested cite for that claim, so the claim is bullshit). The only
way that would be a concern is if we were dropping nukes within a few
hundred miles of the US border, which leads to my comment. Now go
look at a map, phuquewit.
I guess that in your Fairy world No American ever leaves the Homeland to
travel to other countries.
You think there will be "a few hundred thousand" tourists in a country
we're so much at war with that we start using nukes? I'm sorry you
live in Hell.
Post by PaxPerPoten
You are aware that when Hiroshima was Nuked,
that hundreds and maybe thousands of American and Allied prisoners were
present there? The decision to accept peripheral losses of Americans was
in Answer the General Curtis Le May's plans for protecting America.
Long precedent. You are aware that there were a lot of US POWs in
Dresden, right? Hell, Kurt Vonnegut was one of them and even wrote a
book based on it (Slaughterhouse Five).
Post by PaxPerPoten
The
Berlin Airlift was a good example of possible peripheral damage if a
nuclear war broke out over Germany. We had thousands of American
personal there.
Germany would have been tactical nukes. The joke at the time was that
German towns were 1.5 kilotons apart. You think anything changes with
conventional bombing? Dead is dead.
Post by PaxPerPoten
Military and Civilian. Jonthy is rubbing off on you and
like him...Common sense evades you.
You've always been a loony dipshit and that probably won't change
until you go through a course of penicillin.
Better check your lithium drip...It must have run out.
Better check your penile drip...
Why the sudden interest in my Penis, Freddie?
What makes you think anyone is interested in that disease ridden
thing, PoxPerPootin?
Apparently you. You are the interest party ..
I'm sure lots of wrong things are 'apparent' to you, like claiming
that people died horribly who are ... still alive.
Post by PaxPerPoten
And no thanks.. Its
reserved for the better half.
Why do you want to infect him?
--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
only stupid."
-- Heinrich Heine
PaxPerPoten
2017-12-12 05:01:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Wrong. Modern weapons are primarily fusion powered. Above a certain
height (around 2,000 feet for typical US weapons) the only radioactive
fallout comes from the bomb itself and the amount of that is TINY. It
doesn't matter what gets 'sucked up', since none of that material is
activated and is therefore non-radioactive.
Sorry Fred...But you have been drinking the Government Cool-aid'
Anything you suck up into the Nuclear vortex will be contaminated.
Wrong. If it's not in the fireball there's nothing to activate it.
Post by PaxPerPoten
That was proven by the following lists of actual occurrences.
http://tinyurl.com/ycfpd3w3
Virtually all surface blasts on towers, so nothing to support your
claim with regard to air bursts.
Post by PaxPerPoten
Also in 1949 our Military and Government made the decision that a few
hundred thousand Americans as peripheral damage to our nuclear strike on
another Nation was totally acceptable. That outlook has NOT changed!
We were attacking Mexico? Cite for this claim?
I didn't realize that you are a Mexican national?
That explains your luke warm comments on the American Military.
English obviously isn't your first language. YOU said "in 1949 our
Military and Government made the decision that a few hundred thousand
Americans as peripheral damage to our nuclear strike on another Nation
was totally acceptable" (and I note you've failed to provide the
requested cite for that claim, so the claim is bullshit). The only
way that would be a concern is if we were dropping nukes within a few
hundred miles of the US border, which leads to my comment. Now go
look at a map, phuquewit.
I guess that in your Fairy world No American ever leaves the Homeland to
travel to other countries.
You think there will be "a few hundred thousand" tourists in a country
we're so much at war with that we start using nukes? I'm sorry you
live in Hell.
Post by PaxPerPoten
You are aware that when Hiroshima was Nuked,
that hundreds and maybe thousands of American and Allied prisoners were
present there? The decision to accept peripheral losses of Americans was
in Answer the General Curtis Le May's plans for protecting America.
Long precedent. You are aware that there were a lot of US POWs in
Dresden, right? Hell, Kurt Vonnegut was one of them and even wrote a
book based on it (Slaughterhouse Five).
Post by PaxPerPoten
The
Berlin Airlift was a good example of possible peripheral damage if a
nuclear war broke out over Germany. We had thousands of American
personal there.
Germany would have been tactical nukes. The joke at the time was that
German towns were 1.5 kilotons apart. You think anything changes with
conventional bombing? Dead is dead.
Post by PaxPerPoten
Military and Civilian. Jonthy is rubbing off on you and
like him...Common sense evades you.
You've always been a loony dipshit and that probably won't change
until you go through a course of penicillin.
Better check your lithium drip...It must have run out.
Better check your penile drip...
Why the sudden interest in my Penis, Freddie?
What makes you think anyone is interested in that disease ridden
thing, PoxPerPootin?
Apparently you. You are the interest party ..
I'm sure lots of wrong things are 'apparent' to you, like claiming
that people died horribly who are ... still alive.
Post by PaxPerPoten
And no thanks.. Its
reserved for the better half.
Why do you want to infect him?
Heavens no... After all he is your better half.
--
It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard
the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all
ages who mean to govern well, but *They mean to govern*. They promise to
be good masters, *but they mean to be masters*. Daniel Webster
Fred J. McCall
2017-12-12 06:34:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Wrong. Modern weapons are primarily fusion powered. Above a certain
height (around 2,000 feet for typical US weapons) the only radioactive
fallout comes from the bomb itself and the amount of that is TINY. It
doesn't matter what gets 'sucked up', since none of that material is
activated and is therefore non-radioactive.
Sorry Fred...But you have been drinking the Government Cool-aid'
Anything you suck up into the Nuclear vortex will be contaminated.
Wrong. If it's not in the fireball there's nothing to activate it.
Post by PaxPerPoten
That was proven by the following lists of actual occurrences.
http://tinyurl.com/ycfpd3w3
Virtually all surface blasts on towers, so nothing to support your
claim with regard to air bursts.
Post by PaxPerPoten
Also in 1949 our Military and Government made the decision that a few
hundred thousand Americans as peripheral damage to our nuclear strike on
another Nation was totally acceptable. That outlook has NOT changed!
We were attacking Mexico? Cite for this claim?
I didn't realize that you are a Mexican national?
That explains your luke warm comments on the American Military.
English obviously isn't your first language. YOU said "in 1949 our
Military and Government made the decision that a few hundred thousand
Americans as peripheral damage to our nuclear strike on another Nation
was totally acceptable" (and I note you've failed to provide the
requested cite for that claim, so the claim is bullshit). The only
way that would be a concern is if we were dropping nukes within a few
hundred miles of the US border, which leads to my comment. Now go
look at a map, phuquewit.
I guess that in your Fairy world No American ever leaves the Homeland to
travel to other countries.
You think there will be "a few hundred thousand" tourists in a country
we're so much at war with that we start using nukes? I'm sorry you
live in Hell.
Post by PaxPerPoten
You are aware that when Hiroshima was Nuked,
that hundreds and maybe thousands of American and Allied prisoners were
present there? The decision to accept peripheral losses of Americans was
in Answer the General Curtis Le May's plans for protecting America.
Long precedent. You are aware that there were a lot of US POWs in
Dresden, right? Hell, Kurt Vonnegut was one of them and even wrote a
book based on it (Slaughterhouse Five).
Post by PaxPerPoten
The
Berlin Airlift was a good example of possible peripheral damage if a
nuclear war broke out over Germany. We had thousands of American
personal there.
Germany would have been tactical nukes. The joke at the time was that
German towns were 1.5 kilotons apart. You think anything changes with
conventional bombing? Dead is dead.
Post by PaxPerPoten
Military and Civilian. Jonthy is rubbing off on you and
like him...Common sense evades you.
You've always been a loony dipshit and that probably won't change
until you go through a course of penicillin.
Better check your lithium drip...It must have run out.
Better check your penile drip...
Why the sudden interest in my Penis, Freddie?
What makes you think anyone is interested in that disease ridden
thing, PoxPerPootin?
Apparently you. You are the interest party ..
I'm sure lots of wrong things are 'apparent' to you, like claiming
that people died horribly who are ... still alive.
Post by PaxPerPoten
And no thanks.. Its
reserved for the better half.
Why do you want to infect him?
Heavens no... After all he is your better half.
You just really don't read English, do you? And you've been too
boring for too long, since you're unable to support your original
claims.
--
"False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the
soul with evil."
-- Socrates
Fred J. McCall
2017-12-06 07:59:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by george152
Post by PaxPerPoten
We measured significant radiation from airbursts 600 miles from Bikini
way back when, Fred. Also a lot of vapor particulate.
Which test(s) would that be? A lot of Bikini tests were surface
bursts. A lot of them were also multi-megaton blasts.
Post by george152
Post by PaxPerPoten
No matter who is
correct here...A Nuclear detonation anywhere at any level is not in
anybodies best interest. Not to mention that we lost all Electromagnetic
communications for a few hours. Not even VHF/SHF between ships was
functional for a while. Now Strontium 90 infected milk cows as far away
as Wisconsin, Minnesota, the Dakotas and several other states. It sure
didn't get there by UPS truck.
Strontium 90 will tend to concentrate in milk because chemically it
behaves like calcium. Strontium 90, while detected in milk, never
came anywhere close to dangerous levels.
Post by george152
I should include our little trips to Operation Grappel as weather picket
and somewhat closer to the explosions than was good for the crew who
were stood to on deck at the time
Yet studies couldn't find any correlation to show that. Folks who had
observed those tests (which were mostly megaton range and largely
fission; neither would be true of a modern weapon) showed slightly
higher rates of some illnesses than a control group, but the general
population also showed higher rates of those illnesses than the
control group.
--
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to
live in the real world."
-- Mary Shafer, NASA Dryden
PaxPerPoten
2017-12-07 00:15:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by george152
Post by PaxPerPoten
We measured significant radiation from airbursts 600 miles from Bikini
way back when, Fred. Also a lot of vapor particulate.
Which test(s) would that be? A lot of Bikini tests were surface
bursts. A lot of them were also multi-megaton blasts.
Instead of informing you directly..Why don't you look those test up.
That way no one opens up the question of what is true and false and what
might also still be classified. By the way you are trying to divert from
the actual meat of the subject. If this subject is making you nervous,
just disconnect from the discussion.
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by george152
Post by PaxPerPoten
No matter who is
correct here...A Nuclear detonation anywhere at any level is not in
anybodies best interest. Not to mention that we lost all Electromagnetic
communications for a few hours. Not even VHF/SHF between ships was
functional for a while. Now Strontium 90 infected milk cows as far away
as Wisconsin, Minnesota, the Dakotas and several other states. It sure
didn't get there by UPS truck.
Strontium 90 will tend to concentrate in milk because chemically it
behaves like calcium. Strontium 90, while detected in milk, never
came anywhere close to dangerous levels.
Our government thought it was very dangerous in the early 1950s and
dumped a lot of milk.

http://tinyurl.com/y93jq7ng

http://tinyurl.com/ycbpwgw7

A whole list here

http://tinyurl.com/y9ryme5p
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by george152
I should include our little trips to Operation Grappel as weather picket
and somewhat closer to the explosions than was good for the crew who
were stood to on deck at the time
Yet studies couldn't find any correlation to show that. Folks who had
observed those tests (which were mostly megaton range and largely
fission; neither would be true of a modern weapon) showed slightly
higher rates of some illnesses than a control group, but the general
population also showed higher rates of those illnesses than the
control group.
Heh! Heh! If you had read the Medical URLS I posted a few back...You
would find that untrue. Our Government has always lied their asses off
and downplayed such in order to control so-called public panic.

Most ships that were anywhere near the test area's used Salt water spray
over the entire ship for a few hours during test period. This supposedly
protected the humans on board. It was later question whether some of the
Salt water could have been contaminated and thus infected the crew and
the material ship itself. No real answer was ever given by the US Navy.
But there was some small residuals on some of the material ship. No
crewman were known to need any medical treatment.

I cannot stress strongly enough to keep the Nuclear Genie locked up
forever in the bottle. Nuking North Korea would be a Mistake that could
never be corrected. To rattle that Sabre is one thing...To use it in
this circumstance, would be an abomination.
--
It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard
the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all
ages who mean to govern well, but *They mean to govern*. They promise to
be good masters, *but they mean to be masters*. Daniel Webster
Fred J. McCall
2017-12-07 03:36:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
We measured significant radiation from airbursts 600 miles from Bikini
way back when, Fred. Also a lot of vapor particulate.
Which test(s) would that be? A lot of Bikini tests were surface
bursts. A lot of them were also multi-megaton blasts.
Instead of informing you directly..Why don't you look those test up.
That way no one opens up the question of what is true and false and what
might also still be classified. By the way you are trying to divert from
the actual meat of the subject. If this subject is making you nervous,
just disconnect from the discussion.
Lack of content noted. Claim fails. George (not you) asserted there
were such tests. It is up to George to point to the tests he's
referring to.
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
No matter who is
correct here...A Nuclear detonation anywhere at any level is not in
anybodies best interest. Not to mention that we lost all Electromagnetic
communications for a few hours. Not even VHF/SHF between ships was
functional for a while. Now Strontium 90 infected milk cows as far away
as Wisconsin, Minnesota, the Dakotas and several other states. It sure
didn't get there by UPS truck.
Strontium 90 will tend to concentrate in milk because chemically it
behaves like calcium. Strontium 90, while detected in milk, never
came anywhere close to dangerous levels.
Our government thought it was very dangerous in the early 1950s and
dumped a lot of milk.
http://tinyurl.com/y93jq7ng
http://tinyurl.com/ycbpwgw7
A whole list here
http://tinyurl.com/y9ryme5p
Your own cites state that no milk was dumped as a result of nuclear
tests. Do you read things or just do google searches and spew the
results?

<panicky conspiracy theory bullshit elided>
--
"False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the
soul with evil."
-- Socrates
PaxPerPoten
2017-12-08 02:55:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
We measured significant radiation from airbursts 600 miles from Bikini
way back when, Fred. Also a lot of vapor particulate.
Which test(s) would that be? A lot of Bikini tests were surface
bursts. A lot of them were also multi-megaton blasts.
Instead of informing you directly..Why don't you look those test up.
That way no one opens up the question of what is true and false and what
might also still be classified. By the way you are trying to divert from
the actual meat of the subject. If this subject is making you nervous,
just disconnect from the discussion.
Lack of content noted. Claim fails. George (not you) asserted there
were such tests. It is up to George to point to the tests he's
referring to.
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
No matter who is
correct here...A Nuclear detonation anywhere at any level is not in
anybodies best interest. Not to mention that we lost all Electromagnetic
communications for a few hours. Not even VHF/SHF between ships was
functional for a while. Now Strontium 90 infected milk cows as far away
as Wisconsin, Minnesota, the Dakotas and several other states. It sure
didn't get there by UPS truck.
Strontium 90 will tend to concentrate in milk because chemically it
behaves like calcium. Strontium 90, while detected in milk, never
came anywhere close to dangerous levels.
Our government thought it was very dangerous in the early 1950s and
dumped a lot of milk.
http://tinyurl.com/y93jq7ng
http://tinyurl.com/ycbpwgw7
A whole list here
http://tinyurl.com/y9ryme5p
Your own cites state that no milk was dumped as a result of nuclear
tests. Do you read things or just do google searches and spew the
results?
Obviously you did not read the whole thing...Yes we did dump a Helluva a
lot of milk. My Folks dumped sever thousand dollars worth over in
Minnesota at Governmant request/order.
Post by Fred J. McCall
<panicky conspiracy theory bullshit elided>
You remind me of the Movie where Slim Pickens rides a Nuclear Bomb into
Moscow(Dr Strangelove)
--
It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard
the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all
ages who mean to govern well, but *They mean to govern*. They promise to
be good masters, *but they mean to be masters*. Daniel Webster
Fred J. McCall
2017-12-08 05:01:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
We measured significant radiation from airbursts 600 miles from Bikini
way back when, Fred. Also a lot of vapor particulate.
Which test(s) would that be? A lot of Bikini tests were surface
bursts. A lot of them were also multi-megaton blasts.
Instead of informing you directly..Why don't you look those test up.
That way no one opens up the question of what is true and false and what
might also still be classified. By the way you are trying to divert from
the actual meat of the subject. If this subject is making you nervous,
just disconnect from the discussion.
Lack of content noted. Claim fails. George (not you) asserted there
were such tests. It is up to George to point to the tests he's
referring to.
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
No matter who is
correct here...A Nuclear detonation anywhere at any level is not in
anybodies best interest. Not to mention that we lost all Electromagnetic
communications for a few hours. Not even VHF/SHF between ships was
functional for a while. Now Strontium 90 infected milk cows as far away
as Wisconsin, Minnesota, the Dakotas and several other states. It sure
didn't get there by UPS truck.
Strontium 90 will tend to concentrate in milk because chemically it
behaves like calcium. Strontium 90, while detected in milk, never
came anywhere close to dangerous levels.
Our government thought it was very dangerous in the early 1950s and
dumped a lot of milk.
http://tinyurl.com/y93jq7ng
http://tinyurl.com/ycbpwgw7
A whole list here
http://tinyurl.com/y9ryme5p
Your own cites state that no milk was dumped as a result of nuclear
tests. Do you read things or just do google searches and spew the
results?
Obviously you did not read the whole thing...Yes we did dump a Helluva a
lot of milk. My Folks dumped sever thousand dollars worth over in
Minnesota at Governmant request/order.
But not from fallout from atmospheric nuclear air bursts. Go read
your own cites.
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
<panicky conspiracy theory bullshit elided>
You remind me of the Movie where Slim Pickens rides a Nuclear Bomb into
Moscow(Dr Strangelove)
You remind me of someone with syphilis.
--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
only stupid."
-- Heinrich Heine
PaxPerPoten
2017-12-09 02:08:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
We measured significant radiation from airbursts 600 miles from Bikini
way back when, Fred. Also a lot of vapor particulate.
Which test(s) would that be? A lot of Bikini tests were surface
bursts. A lot of them were also multi-megaton blasts.
Instead of informing you directly..Why don't you look those test up.
That way no one opens up the question of what is true and false and what
might also still be classified. By the way you are trying to divert from
the actual meat of the subject. If this subject is making you nervous,
just disconnect from the discussion.
Lack of content noted. Claim fails. George (not you) asserted there
were such tests. It is up to George to point to the tests he's
referring to.
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
No matter who is
correct here...A Nuclear detonation anywhere at any level is not in
anybodies best interest. Not to mention that we lost all Electromagnetic
communications for a few hours. Not even VHF/SHF between ships was
functional for a while. Now Strontium 90 infected milk cows as far away
as Wisconsin, Minnesota, the Dakotas and several other states. It sure
didn't get there by UPS truck.
Strontium 90 will tend to concentrate in milk because chemically it
behaves like calcium. Strontium 90, while detected in milk, never
came anywhere close to dangerous levels.
Our government thought it was very dangerous in the early 1950s and
dumped a lot of milk.
http://tinyurl.com/y93jq7ng
http://tinyurl.com/ycbpwgw7
A whole list here
http://tinyurl.com/y9ryme5p
Your own cites state that no milk was dumped as a result of nuclear
tests. Do you read things or just do google searches and spew the
results?
Obviously you did not read the whole thing...Yes we did dump a Helluva a
lot of milk. My Folks dumped sever thousand dollars worth over in
Minnesota at Government request/order.
But not from fallout from atmospheric nuclear air bursts. Go read
your own cites.
There ya go again... I guess that Strontium and Cesium was over-nite
delivered by UPS.
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
<panicky conspiracy theory bullshit elided>
You remind me of the Movie where Slim Pickens rides a Nuclear Bomb into
Moscow(Dr Strangelove)
You remind me of someone with syphilis.
I wouldn't doubt that you collude with Syphilitics. It does seem to
cloud your judgement.
--
It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard
the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all
ages who mean to govern well, but *They mean to govern*. They promise to
be good masters, *but they mean to be masters*. Daniel Webster
Fred J. McCall
2017-12-09 07:44:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
We measured significant radiation from airbursts 600 miles from Bikini
way back when, Fred. Also a lot of vapor particulate.
Which test(s) would that be? A lot of Bikini tests were surface
bursts. A lot of them were also multi-megaton blasts.
Instead of informing you directly..Why don't you look those test up.
That way no one opens up the question of what is true and false and what
might also still be classified. By the way you are trying to divert from
the actual meat of the subject. If this subject is making you nervous,
just disconnect from the discussion.
Lack of content noted. Claim fails. George (not you) asserted there
were such tests. It is up to George to point to the tests he's
referring to.
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
No matter who is
correct here...A Nuclear detonation anywhere at any level is not in
anybodies best interest. Not to mention that we lost all Electromagnetic
communications for a few hours. Not even VHF/SHF between ships was
functional for a while. Now Strontium 90 infected milk cows as far away
as Wisconsin, Minnesota, the Dakotas and several other states. It sure
didn't get there by UPS truck.
Strontium 90 will tend to concentrate in milk because chemically it
behaves like calcium. Strontium 90, while detected in milk, never
came anywhere close to dangerous levels.
Our government thought it was very dangerous in the early 1950s and
dumped a lot of milk.
http://tinyurl.com/y93jq7ng
http://tinyurl.com/ycbpwgw7
A whole list here
http://tinyurl.com/y9ryme5p
Your own cites state that no milk was dumped as a result of nuclear
tests. Do you read things or just do google searches and spew the
results?
Obviously you did not read the whole thing...Yes we did dump a Helluva a
lot of milk. My Folks dumped sever thousand dollars worth over in
Minnesota at Government request/order.
But not from fallout from atmospheric nuclear air bursts. Go read
your own cites.
There ya go again... I guess that Strontium and Cesium was over-nite
delivered by UPS.
Again, go read your own cites. If you want to make this argument,
provide A VALID CITE. Don't just spray a bunch of google search
lists.
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
<panicky conspiracy theory bullshit elided>
You remind me of the Movie where Slim Pickens rides a Nuclear Bomb into
Moscow(Dr Strangelove)
You remind me of someone with syphilis.
I wouldn't doubt that you collude with Syphilitics. It does seem to
cloud your judgement.
You remain me of someone who has it. You don't have any judgment.
--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
only stupid."
-- Heinrich Heine
tRudy Crayola
2017-12-09 23:16:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
We measured significant radiation from airbursts 600 miles from Bikini
way back when, Fred. Also a lot of vapor particulate.
Which test(s) would that be? A lot of Bikini tests were surface
bursts. A lot of them were also multi-megaton blasts.
Instead of informing you directly..Why don't you look those test up.
That way no one opens up the question of what is true and false and what
might also still be classified. By the way you are trying to divert from
the actual meat of the subject. If this subject is making you nervous,
just disconnect from the discussion.
Lack of content noted. Claim fails. George (not you) asserted there
were such tests. It is up to George to point to the tests he's
referring to.
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
No matter who is
correct here...A Nuclear detonation anywhere at any level is not in
anybodies best interest. Not to mention that we lost all Electromagnetic
communications for a few hours. Not even VHF/SHF between ships was
functional for a while. Now Strontium 90 infected milk cows as far away
as Wisconsin, Minnesota, the Dakotas and several other states. It sure
didn't get there by UPS truck.
Strontium 90 will tend to concentrate in milk because chemically it
behaves like calcium. Strontium 90, while detected in milk, never
came anywhere close to dangerous levels.
Our government thought it was very dangerous in the early 1950s and
dumped a lot of milk.
http://tinyurl.com/y93jq7ng
http://tinyurl.com/ycbpwgw7
A whole list here
http://tinyurl.com/y9ryme5p
Your own cites state that no milk was dumped as a result of nuclear
tests. Do you read things or just do google searches and spew the
results?
Obviously you did not read the whole thing...Yes we did dump a Helluva a
lot of milk. My Folks dumped sever thousand dollars worth over in
Minnesota at Government request/order.
But not from fallout from atmospheric nuclear air bursts. Go read
your own cites.
There ya go again... I guess that Strontium and Cesium was over-nite
delivered by UPS.
Again, go read your own cites. If you want to make this argument,
provide A VALID CITE. Don't just spray a bunch of google search
list
Your failure to comprehend simple straight forward Cites is your
failure! ;-p
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
<panicky conspiracy theory bullshit elided>
You remind me of the Movie where Slim Pickens rides a Nuclear Bomb into
Moscow(Dr Strangelove)
You remind me of someone with syphilis.
I wouldn't doubt that you collude with Syphilitics. It does seem to
cloud your judgement.
You remain me of someone who has it. You don't have any judgment.
Heh! Heh! So you again display your great command of the English
language while on drugs, Dementia, Syphilis or all three plus some.
--
Rudy's Nut & Fruit farm- Sacramento
PaxPerPoten
2017-12-06 23:40:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by george152
Post by PaxPerPoten
We measured significant radiation from airbursts 600 miles from Bikini
way back when, Fred. Also a lot of vapor particulate. No matter who is
correct here...A Nuclear detonation anywhere at any level is not in
anybodies best interest. Not to mention that we lost all
Electromagnetic communications for a few hours. Not even VHF/SHF
between ships was functional for a while. Now Strontium 90 infected
milk cows as far away as Wisconsin, Minnesota, the Dakotas and several
other states. It sure didn't get there by UPS truck.
I should include our little trips to Operation Grappel as weather picket
and somewhat closer to the explosions than was good for the crew who
were stood to on deck at the time
I don't know about that, other then I have trouble getting Glasses
frames for all three eyes. I also visited Hiroshima and Nagasaki in
1957-58 and find out ten years later that those places were still fairly
hot and millions had toured it. Several of my fellow crew-members have
died from lung Cancer believed to be from shipboard asbestos...But no
mention of cancers caused by nuclear testing. There is a book out about
a Japanese Fishing boat that came under a fallout of nuclear ash
hundreds of miles away from the test site. All eventually died from that
fallout. Here is a URL to a large number of news items about it in 1954

http://tinyurl.com/y7lb8nxy

Please read several of them...The one about medical treatment is a must!

What Picket ship were you on and what year?
--
It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard
the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all
ages who mean to govern well, but *They mean to govern*. They promise to
be good masters, *but they mean to be masters*. Daniel Webster
george152
2017-12-07 01:33:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by george152
Post by PaxPerPoten
We measured significant radiation from airbursts 600 miles from
Bikini way back when, Fred. Also a lot of vapor particulate. No
matter who is correct here...A Nuclear detonation anywhere at any
level is not in anybodies best interest. Not to mention that we lost
all Electromagnetic communications for a few hours. Not even VHF/SHF
between ships was functional for a while. Now Strontium 90 infected
milk cows as far away as Wisconsin, Minnesota, the Dakotas and
several other states. It sure didn't get there by UPS truck.
I should include our little trips to Operation Grappel as weather
picket and somewhat closer to the explosions than was good for the
crew who were stood to on deck at the time
I don't know about that, other then I have trouble getting Glasses
frames for all three eyes. I also visited Hiroshima and Nagasaki in
1957-58 and find out ten years later that those places were still fairly
hot and millions had toured it. Several of my fellow crew-members have
died from lung Cancer believed to be from shipboard asbestos...But no
mention of cancers caused by nuclear testing. There is a book out about
a Japanese Fishing boat that came under a fallout of nuclear ash
hundreds of miles away from the test site. All eventually died from that
fallout. Here is a URL to a large number of news items about it in 1954
http://tinyurl.com/y7lb8nxy
Please read several of them...The one about medical treatment is a must!
What Picket ship were you on and what year?
Just do a search for Operation Grappel.
Christmas Island 1957 British H bomb tests

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Fred J. McCall
2017-12-07 03:12:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by george152
Post by PaxPerPoten
We measured significant radiation from airbursts 600 miles from Bikini
way back when, Fred. Also a lot of vapor particulate. No matter who is
correct here...A Nuclear detonation anywhere at any level is not in
anybodies best interest. Not to mention that we lost all
Electromagnetic communications for a few hours. Not even VHF/SHF
between ships was functional for a while. Now Strontium 90 infected
milk cows as far away as Wisconsin, Minnesota, the Dakotas and several
other states. It sure didn't get there by UPS truck.
I should include our little trips to Operation Grappel as weather picket
and somewhat closer to the explosions than was good for the crew who
were stood to on deck at the time
I don't know about that, other then I have trouble getting Glasses
frames for all three eyes. I also visited Hiroshima and Nagasaki in
1957-58 and find out ten years later that those places were still fairly
hot and millions had toured it.
Bullshit. People LIVE in those cities and the background radiation in
them is the same as most of the rest of Japan.
Post by PaxPerPoten
There is a book out about
a Japanese Fishing boat that came under a fallout of nuclear ash
hundreds of miles away from the test site. All eventually died from that
fallout.
Bullshit. First, it was a 15MT surface blast on coral, so the
applicability here to anything that might happen in North Korea is
zero (neither side has a 15MT weapon, for starters, North Korea isn't
made of coral, either). The fishing boat was about 65 miles out
(remember how I told you the 1 rad/hr radiation plume for a surface
burst would be about 160 miles long for a 300KT blast with 15 knot
winds). The crew did stupid shit like stand out in the falling ash
and eat it. Nobody on the fishing boat died from the fallout. They
retrieved their fishing gear (that was the several hours out standing
in the fallout) and sailed back to port, where they received medical
treatment. One guy died from Hepatitus C contracted from blood
transfusions.
--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn
PaxPerPoten
2017-12-08 03:06:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by george152
Post by PaxPerPoten
We measured significant radiation from airbursts 600 miles from Bikini
way back when, Fred. Also a lot of vapor particulate. No matter who is
correct here...A Nuclear detonation anywhere at any level is not in
anybodies best interest. Not to mention that we lost all
Electromagnetic communications for a few hours. Not even VHF/SHF
between ships was functional for a while. Now Strontium 90 infected
milk cows as far away as Wisconsin, Minnesota, the Dakotas and several
other states. It sure didn't get there by UPS truck.
I should include our little trips to Operation Grappel as weather picket
and somewhat closer to the explosions than was good for the crew who
were stood to on deck at the time
I don't know about that, other then I have trouble getting Glasses
frames for all three eyes. I also visited Hiroshima and Nagasaki in
1957-58 and find out ten years later that those places were still fairly
hot and millions had toured it.
Bullshit. People LIVE in those cities and the background radiation in
them is the same as most of the rest of Japan.
Now that is saying a lot. Japan is fighting a losing battle with
contamination of its food supply, water etc. Eventually it will moderate
or get worse due to upcoming disasters.
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
There is a book out about
a Japanese Fishing boat that came under a fallout of nuclear ash
hundreds of miles away from the test site. All eventually died from that
fallout.
Bullshit.
I see you snipped the URL of that ship.

First, it was a 15MT surface blast on coral, so the
Post by Fred J. McCall
applicability here to anything that might happen in North Korea is
zero (neither side has a 15MT weapon, for starters, North Korea isn't
made of coral, either).
Doesn't make any difference now. North Korea is considering coming to
the negotiation table. Procured by the Russians. Could be that food and
comfort are more desirable then many years of the latter.

The fishing boat was about 65 miles out
Post by Fred J. McCall
(remember how I told you the 1 rad/hr radiation plume for a surface
burst would be about 160 miles long for a 300KT blast with 15 knot
winds). The crew did stupid shit like stand out in the falling ash
and eat it. Nobody on the fishing boat died from the fallout.
You should read the official records and the book named after the
ship..Damned near all died and terribly.

They
Post by Fred J. McCall
retrieved their fishing gear (that was the several hours out standing
in the fallout) and sailed back to port, where they received medical
treatment. One guy died from Hepatitus C contracted from blood
transfusions.
Wrong! Read the fucking Book written by a US Navy Medical officer that
was in observance. America did nothing to aid these people other then to
observe. Didn't even advise! I gave you lots of proof and yet like
Jonathon you pick and choose.
I have an old Calvary Saddle you can use to ride the first Nuclear
device into North Korean...Even toss in a Crayon so you can write clever
sayings on the device. ;-p
--
It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard
the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all
ages who mean to govern well, but *They mean to govern*. They promise to
be good masters, *but they mean to be masters*. Daniel Webster
Fred J. McCall
2017-12-08 05:16:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by george152
Post by PaxPerPoten
We measured significant radiation from airbursts 600 miles from Bikini
way back when, Fred. Also a lot of vapor particulate. No matter who is
correct here...A Nuclear detonation anywhere at any level is not in
anybodies best interest. Not to mention that we lost all
Electromagnetic communications for a few hours. Not even VHF/SHF
between ships was functional for a while. Now Strontium 90 infected
milk cows as far away as Wisconsin, Minnesota, the Dakotas and several
other states. It sure didn't get there by UPS truck.
I should include our little trips to Operation Grappel as weather picket
and somewhat closer to the explosions than was good for the crew who
were stood to on deck at the time
I don't know about that, other then I have trouble getting Glasses
frames for all three eyes. I also visited Hiroshima and Nagasaki in
1957-58 and find out ten years later that those places were still fairly
hot and millions had toured it.
Bullshit. People LIVE in those cities and the background radiation in
them is the same as most of the rest of Japan.
Now that is saying a lot. Japan is fighting a losing battle with
contamination of its food supply, water etc. Eventually it will moderate
or get worse due to upcoming disasters.
Now THAT is saying a lot. Not talking about Fukishima, you
intellectually dishonest twat.
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
Post by PaxPerPoten
There is a book out about
a Japanese Fishing boat that came under a fallout of nuclear ash
hundreds of miles away from the test site. All eventually died from that
fallout.
Bullshit.
I see you snipped the URL of that ship.
Which is irrelevant to the fact that your statement that "all
eventually died from that fallout" is bullshit.
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
First, it was a 15MT surface blast on coral, so the
applicability here to anything that might happen in North Korea is
zero (neither side has a 15MT weapon, for starters, North Korea isn't
made of coral, either).
Doesn't make any difference now. North Korea is considering coming to
the negotiation table. Procured by the Russians. Could be that food and
comfort are more desirable then many years of the latter.
What?
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
The fishing boat was about 65 miles out
(remember how I told you the 1 rad/hr radiation plume for a surface
burst would be about 160 miles long for a 300KT blast with 15 knot
winds). The crew did stupid shit like stand out in the falling ash
and eat it. Nobody on the fishing boat died from the fallout.
You should read the official records and the book named after the
ship..Damned near all died and terribly.
Bullshit.

"The crew suffered acute radiation syndrome (ARS) for a number of
weeks after the Bravo test in March. All recovered except for Aikichi
Kuboyama, the boat's chief radioman, who died on September 23, 1954,
from an underlying liver cirrhosis compounded by a secondary hepatitis
C infection."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daigo_Fukury%C5%AB_Maru

"Like the hibakusha, survivors of atomic bombings in Hiroshima and
Nagasaki in 1945, the Lucky Dragon crew were stigmatized because of
the Japanese public’s irrational fear of those exposed to radiation
(it was commonly believed to be contagious). The crew tried to stay
quiet about their exposure for a number of decades, beginning with
their discharge from hospital. A number of the crew also had to move
away from their previous places of residence to get a fresh start."

"Former crew members include the 87-year-old, as of 2014, Susumu
Misaki, who opened a tofu shop after the incident."

"Twenty years old at the time, Matashichi Oishi, who is reported to
have licked the mysterious fallout substance which fell on his ship in
March, 1954 as a taste test to ascertain its properties, was 79 years
old in August 2013. After the exposure, he left his hometown to open a
dry cleaning business. Beginning in the 1980s, he frequently gave
talks advocating nuclear disarmament. In 2011, he published a book
titled, "The Day the Sun Rose in the West: The Lucky Dragon and I."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daigo_Fukury%C5%AB_Maru#Health_history_of_crew
Post by PaxPerPoten
Post by Fred J. McCall
They
retrieved their fishing gear (that was the several hours out standing
in the fallout) and sailed back to port, where they received medical
treatment. One guy died from Hepatitus C contracted from blood
transfusions.
Wrong! Read the fucking Book written by a US Navy Medical officer that
was in observance. America did nothing to aid these people other then to
observe. Didn't even advise!
Where did I say they were treated BY THE US, you lying dipshit?

<snip dipshittery>
--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
only stupid."
-- Heinrich Heine
Byker
2017-12-05 13:24:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Vincent
Post by Byker
Post by Kerryn Offord
South Korea, Japan, Maybe parts of China, parts of Russia.
Not just from NK strikes, but also fallout
Only if they're ground bursts
Even at altitude...The concussive expansion, the heat, lack of humidity
still causes ground debris to rise..mingle with radiation particulate and
to spread to the 4 corners of the earth by the prevailing winds. True that
a full ground burst is more contaminating.... But remember the Strontium
90 scare of the 1950's? Well sir, it is almost 3 times that right now.
After the Atmospheric Test Ban Treaty (1963), Strontium 90 levels peaked and
then dropped rapidly after that. 90Sr concentrations in the urban areas of
the northeastern United States remained at the 1957 levels. Since it has a
half-life of 28 years and the last atmospheric test took place in 1980
(China), today's levels suggest that another source of radioactivity --
possibly nuclear reactors -- has added to 90Sr levels in the environment.
Chernobyl and Fukushima didn't help.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strontium-90

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14460479

https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/PHS/PHS.asp?id=654&tid=120

http://www.encyclopedia.com/history/united-states-and-canada/us-history/strontium-90

http://www.ada.org/en/science-research/science-in-the-news/accumulation-of-a-radioactive-isotope-in-childrens-shed-deciduous-teeth

Trivia: Baby Boomers may remember The Searchers' "What Have They Done to the
Rain?"

http://people.wku.edu/charles.smith/MALVINA/mr183.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Have_They_Done_to_the_Rain

It's about nuclear fallout. IMHO, this Malvina Reynolds protest song was
never done better than this version...
Byker
2017-12-01 15:30:44 UTC
Permalink
The big question is how to handle the walking dead? It is important to
talk carefully with the troops. Once the lethal dose is received do we
ask the troops to simply start high risk work?
We'd also have to contend with the enemy troops who haven't yet died from
the initial (gamma ray) radiation burst...
w***@yahoo.com.sg
2017-11-27 04:01:40 UTC
Permalink
It's easier and cheaper to ship the jihadists back to the caliphate, where they could bomb one another's mosques to their heart's contend.

Wakalukong
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...