Now the Iranians are parading the British soldiers on TV

[7even]

lmao that was a dumb post smoke break, follow your screen name's advice and take one

[Smoke Break]

It is splitting hairs i'll give you that, but, Atom bomb- An explosive weapon of great destructive power derived from the rapid release of energy in the fission of heavy atomic nuclei. while a thermo-nuclear bomb works on fusion. the latter is bigger(1000x more powerful) while the first was a smaller one. Theres a difference.

lmao that was a dumb post smoke break, follow your screen name's advice and take one

7eeeeeeevvvveeeeeennnnnn

[Smoke Break]

Ah. Posing threats with weapons of mass destruction (not to mention using them) is alright now all of a sudden?

I don't know what fucking post you were reading, but i sure never said that.

Patents are only valid for 20 years. Does that mean you're now saying it's been okay since around 1965 for the entire world to arm themselves with totally destructive weaponry?

well the cat's outta the bag at this point, but I really doubt patent rules apply to classified military documents.

Does this mean you support every nation having a nuclear aresenal?(see I can be a retard too!)

[Elevz]

It is splitting hairs i'll give you that, but, Atom bomb- An explosive weapon of great destructive power derived from the rapid release of energy in the fission of heavy atomic nuclei. while a thermo-nuclear bomb works on fusion. the latter is bigger(1000x more powerful) while the first was a smaller one. Theres a difference.

Perhaps I don't fully understand. Explain to me the difference between a nuclear bomb and an atomic bomb? I thought they were one and the same, and therefore an atomic bomb is a nuclear weapon? It may not be the most reliable source ever, but on physics Wikipedia is usually right (as there's no opinions involved). So tell me, are they lying here, or am I making misconceptions?

A nuclear weapon is a weapon which derives its destructive force from nuclear reactions of fission or fusion.

A nuclear reaction is a process in which two nuclei or nuclear particles collide, to produce products different from the initial particles.

Nuclear fission—also known as atomic fission—is a process in nuclear physics and nuclear chemistry in which the nucleus of an atom splits into two or more smaller nuclei as fission products, and usually some by-product particles, hence, fission is a form of elemental transmutation.

Ah. Posing threats with weapons of mass destruction (not to mention using them) is alright now all of a sudden?

I don't know what fucking post you were reading, but i sure never said that.

It's a conclusion I'm drawing after you said this:

nagasaki and hiroshima were hit by atom bombs not only for the japanese to fall further into submission but also to scare the russians.

Patents are only valid for 20 years. Does that mean you're now saying it's been okay since around 1965 for the entire world to arm themselves with totally destructive weaponry?

well the cat's outta the bag at this point, but I really doubt patent rules apply to classified military documents.

Of course I realise there is no such thing as patent for military documents. Thing is, you're saying the USA has the sole right to have nuclear weapons, and I wonder why you think that's justified.

We developed all that shit first(with the help of foreign scientists who also thought we should have it) so yeah we should get the benefits of it.

You developed it? It's a chemical process. That's physics: a science. It's part of the world we live in. How are you going to claim the sole right to enjoy the benefits of it? What, America owns the universe now?

[Smoke Break]

Explain to me the difference between a nuclear bomb and an atomic bomb?

Atom bomb- An explosive weapon of great destructive power derived from the rapid release of energy in the fission of heavy atomic nuclei.
while a thermo-nuclear bomb works on fusion which creates an explosion nearly 1000x larger.
I get what you're saying which is why "It is splitting hairs i'll give you that" but, when talking in context of that war there is a major difference as the thermonuclear "super" bomb wasn't developed until almost 10 years later.
It's kind of like comparing a pistol and rifle, one allows for a much larger bullet, destruction, but both work on the same properties.

Of course I realise there is no such thing as patent for military documents. Thing is, you're saying the USA has the sole right to have nuclear weapons, and I wonder why you think that's justified.

 
 I don't think we have the sole right to it, it's not justified, but it is rational. There were very valid reasons once it was created to stop it from spreading which obviously didn't work out too well. I would have liked to have seen what oppenheimer suggested enacted, which was to end the war by showing what we had in a civilized demonstration to the japanese and russians and share what we discovered with them in the hopes we could have it used for power purposes as well as a deterrent for conflict. Instead what we got was paranoia and the "scorpions in a bottle" stalemate with the soviets and what we have now is the worry that with countrys like iran getting peaceful power facilities may(scratch that, do) find it necessary and easy to turn around and make a bomb for the reason of self-defense in a hostile environment because everyone else does.

We developed all that shit first(with the help of foreign scientists who also thought we should have it) so yeah we should get the benefits of it.

You developed it? It's a chemical process. That's physics: a science. It's part of the world we live in. How are you going to claim the sole right to enjoy the benefits of it? What, America owns the universe now?

The best minds of the world worked on learning and fleshing out that science, but they developed the transportation device and methods to actually detonate it with maximum effect.

[virtuoso]

Why are Iran suddenly the big looming enemy and why this continual use of "we"? I don't understand how you can adopt this stance and yet when I pointed out to you that when Donald Rumsfeld who was on the board of AB at the time sold North Korea 3 water reactors, your reply was "he is a g". What did that mean exactly ....it's gangsta for him to do that but Iran wanting nuclear technology is not acceptable?. I really am bemused how you can compartmentalise the various statements you make.

[Smoke Break]

i just used iran as an example, and what you're talking about I was halfway kidding, lots of actual gangsters will sell you a big shipment of drugs then murder your ass and take it back, just like rumsfeld did. You read way too much into how people say things, like where i said we, rather than what they say, which is good in terms of politics but not internet message boards, these aren't heavily calculated thoughts. I never said Iran shouldn't have that technology either re-read what I said.

[virtuoso]

Forget that last reply I have deleted it in order to post a more constructive one, so for the record where do you stand on Iran? especially when considering the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty isn't worth the toilet paper it was written on.

[Elevz]

Explain to me the difference between a nuclear bomb and an atomic bomb?

Atom bomb- An explosive weapon of great destructive power derived from the rapid release of energy in the fission of heavy atomic nuclei.
while a thermo-nuclear bomb works on fusion which creates an explosion nearly 1000x larger.
I get what you're saying which is why "It is splitting hairs i'll give you that" but, when talking in context of that war there is a major difference as the thermonuclear "super" bomb wasn't developed until almost 10 years later.
It's kind of like comparing a pistol and rifle, one allows for a much larger bullet, destruction, but both work on the same properties.

There are two basic types of nuclear weapons. The first are weapons which produce their explosive energy through nuclear fission reactions alone. These are known colloquially as atomic bombs, A-bombs, or fission bombs.
The second basic type of nuclear weapon produces a large amount of its energy through nuclear fusion reactions, and can be over a thousand times more powerful than fission bombs. These are known as hydrogen bombs, H-bombs, thermonuclear bombs, or fusion bombs. Only six countries—United States, Russia, United Kingdom, People's Republic of China, France, and India—have detonated, or have attempted to detonate, hydrogen bombs.

^^ Wikipedia, once again... A source of information for the ignorant

So. These termo-nuclear bombs are just one type of nuclear bombs, as are the atomic bombs. Yes, these H-bombs are big fuckers, and no, the USA didn't use them back then in Japan. But they might have, had they had one - we don't know. Fact is, they are the ones who did use weapons of mass destruction. The biggest piece of weaponry available at the time.

Of course I realise there is no such thing as patent for military documents. Thing is, you're saying the USA has the sole right to have nuclear weapons, and I wonder why you think that's justified.

 
I don't think we have the sole right to it, it's not justified, but it is rational. There were very valid reasons once it was created to stop it from spreading which obviously didn't work out too well. I would have liked to have seen what oppenheimer suggested enacted, which was to end the war by showing what we had in a civilized demonstration to the japanese and russians and share what we discovered with them in the hopes we could have it used for power purposes as well as a deterrent for conflict. Instead what we got was paranoia and the "scorpions in a bottle" stalemate with the soviets and what we have now is the worry that with countrys like iran getting peaceful power facilities may(scratch that, do) find it necessary and easy to turn around and make a bomb for the reason of self-defense in a hostile environment because everyone else does.

I see what's wrong with Iran arming themselves like that, but isn't the problem that the environment is hostile with nuclear weaponry? Of course, you can put them under control all you like, but there would be no need for that hadn't they been challenged, right?

We developed all that shit first(with the help of foreign scientists who also thought we should have it) so yeah we should get the benefits of it.

You developed it? It's a chemical process. That's physics: a science. It's part of the world we live in. How are you going to claim the sole right to enjoy the benefits of it? What, America owns the universe now?

The best minds of the world worked on learning and fleshing out that science, but they developed the transportation device and methods to actually detonate it with maximum effect.

Haha, so do you still stand by your claim that these scientists really wanted you to enjoy the benefits of having these weapons?

[King Tech Quadafi]

.  The US never did anything like that with Guatanamo Bay prisoners.

no, but they pissed on em and ripped their qurans

why dont u be a man, and stop being a pussy? what is it with you americans, that make u so puss like in nature? is it the ohio well water?

[IRAN iz Gangsta!]

Its official ya'll are bunch of punk pussy ass mothafuckaz with double standards.  They are treated nicely, given food, they confess without force and they are not even complaining.  So WHAT THE FUCK are you liittle bitches moaning about


 

they were abducted from Iraqi waters, it shouldnt of happened, just makes themselves look bad.

I don't mind Iran, obviously they want respect and they got the balls to demand it. But they gotta understand they can not hold out against the West forever...they should use their current position to cut a deal, instead of isolating themselves.

Riiiiiiiiiiite...you see that gov't is all part of the british plan

they've been raising mullahs  over a 100 years in iran

 

[virtuoso]

Tech they did a lot more than that....for your own health do not read the armies own report on guantanamo bay and abu ghraib   . I felt sick to the pit of my stomach when I had read over just a section of it and really wished I had not done so.

[Smoke Break]

These termo-nuclear bombs are just one type of nuclear bombs, as are the atomic bombs.

Sure, it's another type of bomb.

I see what's wrong with Iran arming themselves like that, but isn't the problem that the environment is hostile with nuclear weaponry? Of course, you can put them under control all you like, but there would be no need for that hadn't they been challenged, right?

1)Yes.
2)We've only had the capability for these for like 60 years, thats not a long time at all, and already half the world has an arsenal, we have to get a hold of it soon. As history has shown us there is always eventual conflict so all we can do is hope nobody uses one, and the less people with the capability the better. If they hadn't been sought after by so many nations for the purpose of the bomb rather than the power plant it wouldn't be such a big deal.

Haha, so do you still stand by your claim that these scientists really wanted you to enjoy the benefits of having these weapons?

I never said that either, the weaponry made the scientists on the project sick, as many didn't actually know what they were building; as well as the mathematicians and theorists who saw what their dedicated work had accomplished. There are benefits as well, even if it's just the scientific knowledge that came out of it, which could have been applied much better, under different circumstances.

[Smoke Break]

Forget that last reply I have deleted it in order to post a more constructive one, so for the record where do you stand on Iran? especially when considering the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty isn't worth the toilet paper it was written on.

I've never read that, but i'll take your word for it. Iran is tricky, the people deserve to have the power as it could help them and their neighbors, but I don't trust their current government with a bomb.

[Jip]

if only churchill was still prime minister