Posted on 03/15/2026 3:11:23 PM PDT by Its All Over Except ...
Instead of fighting over a 21-mile-wide bottleneck forever, we cut a new channel through friendly territory. A dozen thermonuclear detonations and you’ve got a waterway wider than the Panama Canal, deeper than the Suez, and safe from Iranian attacks.
...
(Excerpt) Read more at x.com ...
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
“Project Plowshare (1957-1977) tested 27 nuclear detonations for civilian uses like excavation and gas stimulation. It ended without large projects due to radioactive contamination (tritium in water, fallout in debris and products like gas), public/environmental backlash, high costs vs. conventional alternatives, and the 1963 Partial Test Ban Treaty. Proposals for new canals or harbors (e.g., Alaska’s Project Chariot) were canceled for the same reasons—risks outweighed benefits.”
https://x.com/grok/status/2033304461595017560
Or, ship from Alaska, over the top of Canada, under Greenland, and a straight shot to Europe
Or ... you could maybe have not started a war with Iran?
No, no... that’s too extremist. Lets blow up a string of nukes and put billions of tons of radioactive dirt in the air. That’s the rational idea.
Get back on the sofa with Pelosi, fat boy.
Newt actually said this?
That is a much better idea.
And whatever happened with drill, baby, drill?
And put that on “steroids” now that, if this continues in the medium to long term, it would more economically feasible than usual to do so?
It’s right next to the strait. That makes Dubai a trip wire. You think they want to rattle the cage? I think it’s cheaper to kill a few more people.
You’d need port facilities on each end, but if it’s only a 21 mile span, a high-volume pipeline would seem simpler and reasonably cheap - and also somewhat less radioactive.
Once you laid waste, plant plants that will absorb the radition and then harvest them for burning.
Hire the Boring Company to dig the trench?
I don’t think we should use nukes, but cutting a new canal might be a good idea.
Pipelines to the coasts of Egypt and Oman would probably be better.
If I remember my history, decades ago there was a plan to make a new Canal across Nicaragua from the Pacific to Atlantic using this method. and bypass the Panama Canal. It was never done.
If the US Navy can safeguard a carrier, it can safeguard a tanker.
If the US Navy can’t safeguard a tanker, it can’t safeguard a carrier.
In WW2, Japanese kamikaze pilots tried to fly explosive laden planes into US Navy ships.
I was living in Carlsbad when the Project Gnome bomb was set off. It worked! But the natural gas it released was so radioactive it was useless. Other bombs were set off near Aztec NM and in Colorado. Again same problems.
Best line in the whole article.
“The Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty?” Never ratified it. Even if we did, who cares. Next.”
Ha greatness.
He is right.
[The United States is a signatory to the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) but is not a ratified member. While President Clinton signed the treaty in 1996, the U.S. Senate rejected its ratification in 1999 (51-48 vote), leaving the treaty, which requires ratification by 44 specific nations to enter into force, in limbo]
Suck it doves not ratified means it’s moot. We should be popping off nukes in Nevada again like the 4th of July in fact we should on our 250th do exactly that set off a strategic sized nuke in the Pacific atolls again as a celebration and a warning.
There would be a risk of shattering a lot of windows.
In some cases with success, i.e. USS Bunker Hill.
They didn’t try....they did. They were fairly successful.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.