Nuclear Weapons

[chickendude]

Re: RE: Nuclear Weapons

But, hey, it's the best we have. At least those buggers haven't been launched yet.

Because then we'll have 6 year olds battling each for early army training.

[Reach]

Re: RE: Nuclear Weapons

smiting each other has happened all throughout history

from certain viewpoints, it can be said that it made people stronger

There have been countless wars throughout history. Competition for food turned nomads into stay-put civilizations. Competetion made people stronger.
There's so much potential good that can come out of the general idea of a nuclear reaction. It's not like the situation we're in is that much different. It's just at a higher magnitude, but we have more people now don't we? It seems to balance in the end.

we've moved beyond evolution and the survival of the fittest. It's not making us stronger. It's not population control. It's unnecessary loss of lives. And then one even leads to another, greed takes over and history is repeated. And we're at the point now if there ever was a nuclear war, we could be looking at the extinction of the human race.

Nukes are pointless. They just cancel themselves out. If noone had them, we would be fine. But now that everyone has them, noone is going to want to get rid of them. But noone (with a brain) is ever going to fire one, unless they really want to end the world. I personally...if I controlled the nukes, would not fire back. But of course, whoever was fired at will stupidly fire back and destroy the human race. I suppose even if we didn't, the world would be left so corrupt it would never survive anyway. So a nuke is a no win situation.

[The_Q]

RE: Re: RE: Nuclear Weapons

Because then we'll have 6 year olds battling each for early army training.

Which, in my opinion, is better than me battling other people for training. I'd prefer someone else have to deal with it.

"Oh, but Q, if you don't deal with it now you'll end up with a nuke up your ass!" I really could care less. The likelihood that anyone would launch a nuke at us is rather slim. So Russia has 35 pointed at us right now, how many do we have pointed at them? And if we know how many they have, it'd only be fair they know how many we have. In fact, it'd be advantageous to us for them to know that.

Assured Mutual Destruction. Yet another form of communicating.

Q

[Arthur122368]

It would be way cooler to hit ppl with sticks axes and swords to death than miss the target with a nuke because you only found his look-a-like and kill 1-billion innocent unaware by-standers and have to live with it...... DAMN EMO"S

[Tps222]

Dude, please, stop.

Nukes suck. The only way I ever see them getting launched is some shifty Terrorist works, setting countries up. Other than that, I highly doubt it.

[Fungishroom]

What splits the atom? I mean, How does the atom split causing the nuclear reaction?

[jewpinthethird]

What splits the atom? I mean, How does the atom split causing the nuclear reaction?

Well, from what I heard, atoms are pretty chill. But when you heat them up they really start flippin' the sh*t. And sometimes the crash into eachother, which starts a chain reaction. Next think you know a bunch of Japanese people are dead.

[FoJaR]

What splits the atom? I mean, How does the atom split causing the nuclear reaction?

a neutron is fired into the core of an unstable uranium or plutonium molecule, that causes the nucleus of the atom to tear apart. the breaking of the bonds in the nucleus (very strong) releases a lot of energy.

it can also be done by compressing high explosives around the nuclear component, which brings the uranium/plutonium to a critical density.

[msbrunnettemickey]

RE: Nuclear Weapons

Isn't it called something like:

Nuclear fission?

I remember i learned something about it with marbels...

Eh. I only remember how you split a Uranium atom =/

[Sera13]

RE: Nuclear Weapons

Well i am completely convinced that the human race will cuase their own extinction, and it will most likely wont be far away. I have always felt we will wind up blowing ourselves up.

[MalReynolds]

RE: Nuclear Weapons

I really don't think we're going to wipe ourselves out. But that's just me. I think everyone has a bad habit of underestimating man kind. It's not like we blow something up and then not feel bad about it. The first nuke that was dropped, man, the kind of regret that goes with that has to be monumental for everyone involved. So acting like people are just ruthless killing machines couldn't be further from the truth. It would take a true sociopath to even begin to get the human race on the road to self destruction; then he would have to get a hell of a lot of people to follow him.

Mal

[jewpinthethird]

RE: Nuclear Weapons

Personally, I think mankind is too stupid to blow itself up.

If we were smart, we'd have done it already.

[MalReynolds]

RE: Nuclear Weapons

Underestimate, severley underestimate... Potato, potato. We get the same result either way.

Mal

EDIT: I just noticed the potato potato thing doesn't work unless spoken. The second one is "Po-tah-toe" while the first one is "Po-tay-toe".

So... Potaytoe Potahtoe.

[FoJaR]

Re: RE: Nuclear Weapons

Isn't it called something like:

Nuclear fission?

I remember i learned something about it with marbels...

Eh. I only remember how you split a Uranium atom =/

marbles, and fission is the first one i talked about, where you fire a neutron...

the other method uses pressure... i think fatman, the bomb used on nagasaki was one of the implosion types.

[FoJaR]

RE: Re: RE: Nuclear Weapons

as far as countries using nuclear weapons on each other, if it's going to happen anywhere, it will be between india and pakistan, and that doesnt seem very likely at the moment.