Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: ANGGAPO

The author apparently does not understand that small nukes are much harder to make than large nukes.


17 posted on 10/25/2006 9:00:42 AM PDT by Straight Vermonter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: Straight Vermonter
The author apparently does not understand that small nukes are much harder to make than large nukes.

What you do not understand is this scenerio does not depend on large nukes with lots of destructive power.

The story is not talking about a single nuke that could destroy the city of Washington. He is talking about a small nuke that would destroy the White House. It takes two more nukes to get the capital building and the pentagon.

Making big nukes small is hard. Making little nukes little is not nearly so hard.

20 posted on 10/25/2006 11:10:36 AM PDT by Common Tator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: Straight Vermonter; Common Tator
1950's technology:


21 posted on 10/25/2006 1:11:19 PM PDT by null and void (Age and experience -- It makes no sense to get one without the other. - Sundog)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson