+- Qbasicnews.com (http://qbasicnews.com/newforum)
+-- Forum: General (http://qbasicnews.com/newforum/forum-6.html)
+--- Forum: General/Misc (http://qbasicnews.com/newforum/forum-18.html)
+--- Thread: Opinion on war? (/thread-455.html)
Opinion on war? - _Bill_ - 03-24-2003
Neg the word for a material that will fission is fissile. U238?(Uranium 238 isotope?) Nah that wont blow but it would make a dirty bomb. And an antimatter atom is supposed to destroy a matter atom when thay come in contact. But I don't believe everything that scientents say untill I see some sort of proof so I have no opinion on that.
Opinion on war? - oracle - 03-24-2003
Your Japanes reactors must be pretty screwed then. The whole point of a nuclear reactor is to be a place where Uranium or Plutonium atoms can be blown apart in a barely contained nuclear bomb. Any reactor could 'meltdown.' But perhaps Japanese reactors don't produce weapons grade stuff.
U238 is the name of the Uranium isotope with a mass no. 238. Uranium has 92 protons in its nucleus, plus 146 neutrons. Uranium also has two other isotopes - U235 (the actual fuel of a reactor) and U234, each with a smaller number of neutrons.
Opinion on war? - _Bill_ - 03-24-2003
Yea I know that I was asking toonski if that was the isotope he was talking about.
Opinion on war? - toonski84 - 03-24-2003
Well, no shit sherlock, but there are more than one type of nuclear material (my apologies on fissile, that is a word). But the reactors in japan dont use weapons grade. it could potentially be used for a bomb, but the material needs to be refined, and even then it would only be a few kilotons. the process of stealing it, refining it and placing it in a bomb is more trouble than just buying and using conventional explosives to the same effect.
Opinion on war? - Agamemnus - 03-24-2003
Quote: 20? over 350 cruise missiles have been targeted in baghdad, a city of over 5 million people,
I think it's approaching 3000 for the entire country now.
You said there were a million casualries already and that everyone lost their homes.
:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
Saddam Hussein even says that there were N injuries and no casualties in Baghdad, and I can still see the homes through the cameras on Fox.
Or maybe they're just re-running the tapes?
:roll:
Opinion on war? - na_th_an - 03-24-2003
Quote:Quote: 20? over 350 cruise missiles have been targeted in baghdad, a city of over 5 million people,
I think it's approaching 3000 for the entire country now.
You said there were a million casualries already and that everyone lost their homes.
:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
Saddam Hussein even says that there were N injuries and no casualties in Baghdad, and I can still see the homes through the cameras on Fox.
Or maybe they're just re-running the tapes?
:roll:
Y'know, Iraq is a big country, it is not only Baghdad. There HAVE BEEN many casualties in other towns, most of them have been destroyed by the bombs.
This morning an American missile hit a bus full of civils from Siria who were scaping to their country. Nice hit, Mr. Bush. Now you have scored 5748834 and you have the new bonus. Write your initials.
Opinion on war? - Agamemnus - 03-24-2003
You have no proof. :roll:
Opinion on war? - toonski84 - 03-25-2003
of denial.
300,000 iraqis died in the first gulf war, and it lasted three days. During the "shock and awe" or whatever the hell we call it we've fired off more artillary from the entire gulf war per day, for the past week, into one of the world's largest cities, so how many people do you suppose are dead? How many people died today? Just because they dont show it on fox news doesnt mean it happens. We ARE the bad guys in this war. We invaded a nation unprovoked and are firing missiles into civilian cities.
Opinion on war? - oracle - 03-25-2003
This is exactly the debate that is going on in NZ right now... Is it right for GB to go invading another country without UN permission, based on flimsy and often downright false evidence? Or should we be thanking him for ridding the world of a despot whose policies have killed more of his own citizens than any US led war could make? I tend towards the former.
Don't forget that people die from the sanctions because of Saddam, not because of the US. Adequate food, medicine etc. does get throuh but Saddam hordes it for the royal guard or what ever they are called.
After the war there will be a big question. When the US wins, will GB be put on trial for war crimes for starting an illegal war?
Will anyone be stupid/brave enough to suggest this???
Opinion on war? - toonski84 - 03-25-2003
actually, people are already making plans to. Which is dumb, because while the UN doesnt back this war, if you know how the UN works, the five or so superpowers get a much higher ranked vote than any of the others. America and Britain are among these. There are also all the countries who dont have the gall to vote against him or others who are too economically dependent on America to risk a vote. So no, if someone ever does indite him, it'll never go through, but on second thought the bad publicity might be enough to prevent him from getting a second term. You gotta remember, that beneath all the super-hero/villain fasad it's all political.