Would you go to war?

jansdejager said:
War can always be avoided with sober minds and strength of character. You are never fighting for anyone but yourself.
Click to expand...

Re - War can always be avoided with sober minds and strength of character
That's what Neville Chamberlain wanted to believe but events proved him wrong and, terrible as it was, WW2 was necessary to stop Hitler. The pity is that Stalin remained.
 
nightjar said:
Re - War can always be avoided with sober minds and strength of character
That's what Neville Chamberlain wanted to believe but events proved him wrong and, terrible as it was, WW2 was necessary to stop Hitler. The pity is that Stalin remained.
Click to expand...

Yup and sometimes war is the only solution but some people think a hug and a kiss will solve problems which it wont
 
Done it before for SA and will do it again but only because I haven't the funds to leave SA with family and pets.
I wouldn't be doing it for anyone else but the ones closest to me.
I also wouldn't operate under a tw@ts orders.
 
Yes with e-tolling there was talk of Gauteng hoisting the old vierkleur since most of the economic activity is attributed to them. It's a valid point. I suppose the union was only created in the interest of defence, and to get access to shipping and trade. And we all know how edgy the valies get when they can't have their annual bath in aquamarine.

za-trans.gif
 
BandwidthAddict said:
I don't know many 300 year old Japanese from Hiroshima or Nagasaki and yet both places are rebuilt and populated.
Click to expand...

you do know what fallout is? you do know why Chernobyl is still uninhabitable? you do know why the nuclear reactor that is leaking in Japan is such a huge risk? :p

there are different factors involved, there is still radiation in Hiroshima, just not deadly enough to humans and animals any more
 
STS said:
you do know what fallout is? you do know why Chernobyl is still uninhabitable? you do know why the nuclear reactor that is leaking in Japan is such a huge risk? :p

there are different factors involved, there is still radiation in Hiroshima, just not deadly enough to humans and animals any more
Click to expand...

The fallout from the Hiroshima & Nagasaki bombs, both of which detonated in the air, was very different to that from a ground level explosion and was negligible soon after detonation. The Hiroshima bomb exploded 1890 feet above ground and the majority of the radiation, emanating from the fireball, was lethal within about 3.5 km of ground zero, along with the heat, blast and flying debris. Most of the radiation was contained in the mushroom cloud and remained in the atmosphere for several weeks, decaying to safe levels before falling to the ground. In the following weeks many people who were seemingly unhurt died from radiation sickness delivered at the time.

Chernobyl and Fukushima were ground explosions and produced caesium 137 and iodine 131 fallout with half lives of 30 years and 8 days respectively mixed with large quantities of dust and steam blown into into the atmosphere and spread over many thousands of square kilometres.
 
nightjar said:
The fallout from the Hiroshima & Nagasaki bombs, both of which detonated in the air, was very different to that from a ground level explosion and was negligible soon after detonation. The Hiroshima bomb exploded 1890 feet above ground and the majority of the radiation, emanating from the fireball, was lethal within about 3.5 km of ground zero, along with the heat, blast and flying debris. Most of the radiation was contained in the mushroom cloud and remained in the atmosphere for several weeks, decaying to safe levels before falling to the ground. In the following weeks many people who were seemingly unhurt died from radiation sickness delivered at the time.

Chernobyl and Fukushima were ground explosions and produced caesium 137 and iodine 131 fallout with half lives of 30 years and 8 days respectively mixed with large quantities of dust and steam blown into into the atmosphere and spread over many thousands of square kilometres.
Click to expand...

Not just that. hiroshima and Nagasaki was a large amount of prompt radiation, followed by a much smaller amount of residual.
The hazardous zone that will be lethal to man for centuries can be measured in meters. We put up monuments to the victims.

Chernobyl was not a blast, but a runaway nuclear reaction combined with a graphite fire that burned for weeks. Effect wise it has been equivalent to all the Nuclear Tests done in the world. Its hazardous zone can be measured in km. :wtf: Best we can do is declare a large national park around it and cap it in a giant arch.
chernobyldome1.jpg

And Fukushima was a human error screw-up that is slowly leeching into the ecosystem. Its hazardous zone is a few km in diameter. Like Chernobyl - its mostly lethal to long lived organisms like man. But it can still be contained and cleaned up. For now...
 
we have yet to detonate MULTIPLE nukes at once over a country however :p bombing a city is very different to bombing a country
 
All is fair in war, but things take a different spin when chemical and nuclear warfare or testing is conducted without public knowledge. In one famous example John Wayne was thought to have contracted cancer while shooting down-wind from a nuclear testing site while on set in the Arizona desert.
 
Compton_effect said:
Chernobyl ... equivalent to all the Nuclear Tests done in the world. Its hazardous zone can be measured in km. :wtf: Best we can do is declare a large national park around it and cap it in a giant arch....
Click to expand...

Thanks. Never knew that.

Interesting article & pics here - http://www.businessinsider.com/photos-of-chernobyl-today-2014-4?op=1

I saw a National Geographic article on how wildlife has thrived in the Chernobyl area and will post the link if I can find it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X