Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Itzlzha
A nuke isn't a precision weapon. If a nuke could be dropped within a dozen miles of an oil field and destroy the oil field, this depends on the size of the nuke but assuming it comes from an ICBM it's not going to be a tactical warhead.
43 posted on 09/04/2003 6:43:14 PM PDT by bitcon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies ]


To: bitcon
OK, you assume they would use a Mega-ton yield near an oil field...nice to see that you think the Military so dumb...

Second, they are using air-burst at about 1500'. Overpressure and thermal will wipe the surface clean and create a glass plain. Now, the Oil is deep. I'm not discounting some surface contamination, but the general field should be safe.

Any "Radioactive" oil can be used in reactors where it would get exposure to Gammma anyway...so long as the contamination was below (X), and not of a corrosive/damaging particulate nature. ( I know, I've got contacts that confirm this usage.)

Third, we tend to use Fusion, so the dirty stuff is mostly consumed.

49 posted on 09/04/2003 8:00:17 PM PDT by Itzlzha (The avalanche has already started...it is too late for the pebbles to vote!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies ]

To: bitcon
A nuke isn't a precision weapon. If a nuke could be dropped within a dozen miles of an oil field and destroy the oil field, this depends on the size of the nuke but assuming it comes from an ICBM it's not going to be a tactical warhead.

Depends on how recent the nuke is. A Trident is as accurate as any conventional PGM.

67 posted on 09/05/2003 3:09:16 AM PDT by eno_ (Freedom Lite - it's almost worth defending)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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