1
   

WAS COVERT ATTEMPT TO NUKE IRAN FOILED BY LEAK?

 
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Oct, 2007 07:47 am
oralloy wrote:
Advocate wrote:
Kennedy was wrong in drawing the line in Cuba. Had he attacked, we would have lost 90 million people.


Better dead than red.



You mean that kept us from turning red?
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Nov, 2007 08:57 am
Quote:
Better dead than red.


The American mind. Such an example of efficiency. It can be completely encapsulated as a bumper sticker.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Nov, 2007 09:23 am
I didn't get my degree from the teacher's training college - nor the foreign language faculty. Embarrassed






:wink:
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Nov, 2007 09:27 am
Walter Hinteler wrote:
I didn't get my degree from the teacher's training college - nor the foreign language faculty. Embarrassed






:wink:


Goddamn Germans. I can never understand them. And that includes my grandparents.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Nov, 2007 09:48 am
oralloy wrote:
I challenge you to demonstrate how even one of my statements is nonsensical.


Thats not difficult oralloy. Here's a couple from recent posts

1. you said

oralloy wrote:
The only experiment over uranium vs. plutonium devices was the Trinity test back in the US.


I said that was wrong. There was no uranium vs. plutonium test at Trinity. Trinity was a test of the implosion mechanism only. It was not a comparison test between the uranium and plutonium bombs. It was a test of the implosion method, to see if it worked or not. The actual experiment uranium vs. plutonium took place in Japan at Hiroshima and Nagasaki respectively.

you said

oralloy wrote:
The fact that the gun bomb was certain to work, and the implosion bomb was tested at Trinity, shows that I am not wrong.


Which is an admission that there was no comparison uranium vs. plutonium test at Trinity and demonstrates by your own words that you were in fact wrong to claim that there was.

2.
oralloy wrote:
Better dead than red.


This is nonsense. That is it makes no sense. Exactly how is it better to be dead than red? You could not possibly devise an experiment to test your hypothesis. In any case, why do you hate the colour red so much that you would prefer to be dead? There is red I believe in the flag of the United States of America. Do you feel an urge to kill yourself everytime you gaze upon it? Why red and not any other colour?

If on the other hand you are referring to a political system under which you would not want to live, how can you possibly compare being dead i.e. a state of not living.... under say communism with not living under any other political system? Its a nonsense and you have therefore made at least two nonsensical statements in your recent posts.

Note I havent commented on your claimed omniscience re all matters pertaining to nuclear weapons. Laughing
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Nov, 2007 03:14 pm
Steve 41oo wrote:
oralloy wrote:
I challenge you to demonstrate how even one of my statements is nonsensical.


Thats not difficult oralloy. Here's a couple from recent posts

1. you said

oralloy wrote:
The only experiment over uranium vs. plutonium devices was the Trinity test back in the US.


I said that was wrong. There was no uranium vs. plutonium test at Trinity. Trinity was a test of the implosion mechanism only. It was not a comparison test between the uranium and plutonium bombs. It was a test of the implosion method, to see if it worked or not. The actual experiment uranium vs. plutonium took place in Japan at Hiroshima and Nagasaki respectively.

you said

oralloy wrote:
The fact that the gun bomb was certain to work, and the implosion bomb was tested at Trinity, shows that I am not wrong.


Which is an admission that there was no comparison uranium vs. plutonium test at Trinity and demonstrates by your own words that you were in fact wrong to claim that there was.


There was no need to conduct a test of the gun bomb at Trinity in order to compare the two.

If you'd like to be slightly more accurate, we could say the comparison between the two bombs was at Trinity and "wherever it was that they brought Little Boy up to the edge of criticality and took readings of the radiation emitted".

My main point was that all the questions on that issue were settled before any A-bombs were dropped on Japan.

The reason Japan was nuked twice is because they chose to surrender between the second and third bombs. Had Japan chosen to surrender between the third and fourth bombs they would have been nuked three times.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Nov, 2007 03:58 pm
oralloy wrote:
If you'd like to be slightly more accurate, we could say the comparison between the two bombs was at Trinity and "wherever it was that they brought Little Boy up to the edge of criticality and took readings of the radiation emitted".
Thats surprising for someone who has done all the research on this topic. For your information the Dragon experiment took place at Omega Canyon (part of the Los Alamos complex) in late 1944, supervised by Otto Frisch. A super critical assembly of uranium hydride was completed momentarily by allowing a slug of the same material to drop through it. A temperature rise of 2 deg C per millisecond was recorded. But note this was for the hydride, the pure metal would react much quicker in the bomb itself. The Trinity test events of 16th July 1945 are well documented.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Nov, 2007 10:17 pm
Steve 41oo wrote:
oralloy wrote:
If you'd like to be slightly more accurate, we could say the comparison between the two bombs was at Trinity and "wherever it was that they brought Little Boy up to the edge of criticality and took readings of the radiation emitted".
Thats surprising for someone who has done all the research on this topic. For your information the Dragon experiment took place at Omega Canyon (part of the Los Alamos complex) in late 1944, supervised by Otto Frisch. A super critical assembly of uranium hydride was completed momentarily by allowing a slug of the same material to drop through it. A temperature rise of 2 deg C per millisecond was recorded. But note this was for the hydride, the pure metal would react much quicker in the bomb itself. The Trinity test events of 16th July 1945 are well documented.


That test confirmed the viability of the gun bomb and answered all questions over whether it would work, and how well it would work -- just as the Trinity test answered the same questions for the implosion bomb.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2007 11:02 am
Cute bit from Benen...
Quote:
Admiral Fallon's words of wisdom
Admiral William Fallon, head of U.S. Central Command, which oversees military operations in the Middle East, has heard plenty of war-mongering rhetoric from the right when it comes to Iran. He's come to an important conclusion: it's not helping.

"None of this is helped by the continuing stories that just keep going around and around and around that any day now there will be another war which is just not where we want to go," he said.

"Getting Iranian behaviour to change and finding ways to get them to come to their senses and do that is the real objective. Attacking them as a means to get to that spot strikes me as being not the first choice in my book."


I look forward to Rudy Giuliani and his foreign policy advisors explaining why Admiral Fallon is guilty of pre-9/11 thinking. Who knows, maybe we'll even hear Limbaugh dismiss him as a "phony soldier."

--Steve Benen

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2007 11:14 am
steve

Somewhat off topic but I thought you'd appreciate this one...
Quote:
The Bush administration is losing patience with Gordon Brown over Iran, with senior American diplomats frustrated by his reluctance to declare bluntly that the Islamic state must never be allowed nuclear weapons.

Allies of Condoleezza Rice, the US Secretary of State, have told The Sunday Telegraph that the Prime Minister should emulate France's President Nicolas Sarkozy...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/11/11/wiran111.xml

Next evolution in modern American conservatives' any-port-in-a-storm foundation for principles... the French poodle, most noble and brave of beasts. I see a poster here involving an eagle and sodomy.
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2007 12:21 pm
In defence of the poodle- not to be confused with the toy poodle- it can be a very butch dog. Grrrrrr
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2007 01:38 pm
blatham wrote:
steve

Somewhat off topic but I thought you'd appreciate this one...
Quote:
The Bush administration is losing patience with Gordon Brown over Iran, with senior American diplomats frustrated by his reluctance to declare bluntly that the Islamic state must never be allowed nuclear weapons.

Allies of Condoleezza Rice, the US Secretary of State, have told The Sunday Telegraph that the Prime Minister should emulate France's President Nicolas Sarkozy...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/11/11/wiran111.xml

Next evolution in modern American conservatives' any-port-in-a-storm foundation for principles... the French poodle, most noble and brave of beasts. I see a poster here involving an eagle and sodomy.
Very Happy Thanks Gordon Broon makes an important foreign policy speech tonight. (Wearing white tie and tails)
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2007 03:44 pm
McTag wrote:
In defence of the poodle- not to be confused with the toy poodle- it can be a very butch dog. Grrrrrr


Your scots terrier accent comes through on the grrrr.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2007 10:46 pm
Quote:
Efraim Halevy, the former head of the Israeli intelligence agency Mossad, titled his memoirs "Man in the Shadows." But now that he's out in the sunlight, the 72-year-old retired spy chief has some surprisingly contrarian things to say about Iran and Syria. The gist of his message is that rather than constantly ratcheting up the rhetoric of confrontation, the United States and Israel should be looking for ways to establish a creative dialogue with these adversaries.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/09/AR2007110901941.html

But what the phuck would a fellow who headed up Mossad know? Damn jew-hating appeaser.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Nov, 2007 06:24 am
Bernie quoted-

Quote:
The gist of his message is that rather than constantly ratcheting up the rhetoric of confrontation, the United States and Israel should be looking for ways to establish a creative dialogue with these adversaries.


"Creative dialogue" means anything anyone wishes it to mean and thus the sentence is meaningless, as it was no doubt intended to be, and not worth quoting.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Nov, 2007 08:32 am
spendi

What sources do you use to get your information on the middle east?
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Nov, 2007 08:40 am
blatham wrote:
spendi

What sources do you use to get your information on the middle east?
I think you'll have to explain the word source.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Nov, 2007 08:44 am
Oh. Perhaps so. It's that gooey stuff that englishmen from spendi's region lather all over their inexpensive cuts of beef.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Nov, 2007 09:38 am
The source? You need ask?

From a vague understanding of the English Language of course.

That suggests to me that the expression "creative dialogue" has no meaning and in the context it was used even less than that.

The chattering classes love it though. It allows them to imagine that sitting on their arses wolfing down posh nosh is a dignified way to spend an evening. It's called networking and there are creative dialogues all over the place. So much so that they are getting a bit common in my estimation.

What is to be created anyway? Peace eh?

My study of history leads me to think that peace has to be imposed and that creative dialogue is simply a means of providing time for loading up the armouries so that when the bust up comes it's a bigger conflagration than it would have been had it gone off earlier.

By that logic, and don't just assert it's stupid--please-- creative dialogue leads to bigger conflagrations.

But recreation from ashes is creative isn't it?
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Nov, 2007 10:01 am
spendi

It is a great loss to your nation that you did not consider a lifetime practicing criminal law. We agree, obviously, that pretty much everyone the police point to is guilty of something and thus it would be entirely better for all if they were in the stocks being ravished by large hairy foreign cell mates. And if you would have acted as solicitor, with your style of 'reasoning', not a one of your clients would have much chance of being back on the street post-trial.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/29/2024 at 07:23:51