Nuclear (i.e. fission and fusion) mythologies and politics

You never had an argument, simply incredulity. But again, you don't believe your stances on these issues.
 
Will Barack Obama be able to make a speech about nuclear weapons being a Cold War hoax? I think he will be able to pull it off. He can't look anymore embarrassed than he already does.
 
Anders Lindman said:
Will Barack Obama be able to make a speech about nuclear weapons being a Cold War hoax? I think he will be able to pull it off. He can't look anymore embarrassed than he already does.
Click to expand...

Maybe at the Correspondents Dinner? Might generate a few laughs.
 
Uzzy said:
Maybe at the Correspondents Dinner? Might generate a few laughs.
Click to expand...

Yes, and that's a good way of introducing the idea to people without hitting them directly with the information. Kind of like softening up their conditioned subconscious patterns.
 
You have pretend to have nothing but incredulity, instead of an actual argument.

ETA: Also, an argument supports a stance.
 
Last edited:
Anders Lindman said:
Yes, and that's a good way of introducing the idea to people without hitting them directly with the information. Kind of like softening up their conditioned subconscious patterns.
Click to expand...

Or showing it up as the laughable joke it is. Whatever works.
 
It would be fun if some governmental agents would post here and try to win an argument over me. I would pulverize them and their boss would fire them.
 
Ok, here's a little question for you Anders. How many B-29's do you think were needed for a firebombing raid that could destroy a city, such as the raids you think destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
 
Uzzy said:
Ok, here's a little question for you Anders. How many B-29's do you think were needed for a firebombing raid that could destroy a city, such as the raids you think destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Click to expand...

Are you implying that is would be impossible? Compare with Tokyo.
 
Anders Lindman said:
Are you implying that is would be impossible? Compare with Tokyo.
Click to expand...

Not at all. It is obviously possible, given the Firebombing raids on Tokyo and Dresden (though obviously Lancaster's were used in that attack). But what I'm asking you is how many B-29's do you think would have been needed to do such a task. Rough estimate if you're lacking in knowledge of WW2 Bombing. You can even compare with Tokyo if you wish.
 
Uzzy said:
Not at all. It is obviously possible, given the Firebombing raids on Tokyo and Dresden (though obviously Lancaster's were used in that attack). But what I'm asking you is how many B-29's do you think would have been needed to do such a task. Rough estimate if you're lacking in knowledge of WW2 Bombing. You can even compare with Tokyo if you wish.
Click to expand...

Your question may or may not be relevant. It depends on whether B-29s or some other planes were used. Or not. The Japanese government cooperated with the U.S. government at the end of the war. So the burning down of Hiroshima and Nagasaki could have been done by the Japanese government rather than by actual firebombings.
 
Last edited:
Anders Lindman said:
Your question may or may not be relevant. It depends on whether B-29s or some other planes were used. Or not. The Japanese government cooperated with the U.S. government at the end of the war. So the burning down of Hiroshima and Nagasaki could have been done by the Japanese government rather than by actual firebombings.
Click to expand...

It's entirely relevant. I won't be distracted by your idiocy regarding the idea that the Japanese government (which, lets not forget, was at war with the United States) might have burned down two major cities and killed 150,000 people for.. well, no real reason.

How many planes do you think it would have taken for a firebombing mission on the scale required to destroy Hiroshima and Nagasaki? By comparison, the raid on Tokyo used 346 B-29's, while the Dresden bombing used 772 Lancasters. So, how many bombers, Anders?
 
Why did the Japanese government cooperate with the U.S. government to fake the two atom bomb explosions? The Japanese government knew at that time that the war was in practice already lost and instead of Kamikazing themselves into oblivion and have the Soviet Union taking over half their country the deal with the U.S. government gave them an excuse to tell the Japanese citizens that they must surrender and in this way they could avoid a messy ending and save face.
 
Uzzy said:
It's entirely relevant. I won't be distracted by your idiocy regarding the idea that the Japanese government (which, lets not forget, was at war with the United States) might have burned down two major cities and killed 150,000 people for.. well, no real reason.

How many planes do you think it would have taken for a firebombing mission on the scale required to destroy Hiroshima and Nagasaki? By comparison, the raid on Tokyo used 346 B-29's, while the Dresden bombing used 772 Lancasters. So, how many bombers, Anders?
Click to expand...

Not so fast. You shouldn't dismiss my explanation in post #419.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom