Defense Industry Whores Release Nuclear Iran Ad To Scare America

[TheOldSchool]

"Because Little Boy was an air burst 580 metres (1,900 ft) above the ground, there was no bomb crater and no local radioactive fallout."

Little Boy - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

It was not burst in the air under consideration for Japan, but because that's how you maximize damage from a nuke.

Eat my shorts Ilar.

Well, it is marginal, but at least I got you to look at a source. Wikipedia is pretty fucking lame, but let's run with it for now.

Yes, it was an airburst. And WHY it was an airburst is irrelevant.

And that an airburst tended to minimize radioactive fallout is not even disputed. But "minimization of" is not the "elimination of" fallout, you asshole.

Morons like you STILL wish to pretend that there was no increased radiation in Hiroshima after the smoke cleared. You are dishonest and/or ignorant.

All that said, I will agree that the time period in which the lethal radiation lingered is considerably smaller than most people would guess. But there was still a fairly high radiation level being measured several moths later.

At PRESENT, according to some information I have seen, the background radiation IN Hiroshima and Nagasaki is approximately the SAME as the normal background radiation level for the rest of the planet (excluding hotspots like Fukishima and Chernobyl).

Oh there was high radiation levels several months later? What level was it?

2 months after the bomb was dropped there were tens of thousands of American troops occupying both Hiroshima and Nagasaki. None of the troops had any issues with radiation.

http://www.dtra.mil/documents/ntpr/factsheets/hiroshima_and_nagasaki_occupation_forces.pdf

Now if you're going to plug your ears and whine again just say you're not interested in learning anything and we can't stop this dance.

Yes. High levels several months later. You can cherry pick whatever tidbits of propaganda you wish. But your sources are a bit biased since the US was busy trying to convince the world that the two bombs they had unleashed were not "as" dangerous as some folks were then being led to believe.

The fact is, you hack, if you had the capacity to notice it: I was actually in partial (limited) agreement with some of what you have said.

But, my dance card is full, and going further with your bleating nonsense is not on the agenda.

K go make things up in another thread.

No. Again, I leave that kind of shit to you. And by all means, when pressed, please make extensive use of wikipedia.

And please continue your extensive use of zero sources

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Well, it is marginal, but at least I got you to look at a source. Wikipedia is pretty fucking lame, but let's run with it for now.

Yes, it was an airburst. And WHY it was an airburst is irrelevant.

And that an airburst tended to minimize radioactive fallout is not even disputed. But "minimization of" is not the "elimination of" fallout, you asshole.

Morons like you STILL wish to pretend that there was no increased radiation in Hiroshima after the smoke cleared. You are dishonest and/or ignorant.

All that said, I will agree that the time period in which the lethal radiation lingered is considerably smaller than most people would guess. But there was still a fairly high radiation level being measured several moths later.

At PRESENT, according to some information I have seen, the background radiation IN Hiroshima and Nagasaki is approximately the SAME as the normal background radiation level for the rest of the planet (excluding hotspots like Fukishima and Chernobyl).

Oh there was high radiation levels several months later? What level was it?

2 months after the bomb was dropped there were tens of thousands of American troops occupying both Hiroshima and Nagasaki. None of the troops had any issues with radiation.

http://www.dtra.mil/documents/ntpr/factsheets/hiroshima_and_nagasaki_occupation_forces.pdf

Now if you're going to plug your ears and whine again just say you're not interested in learning anything and we can't stop this dance.

Yes. High levels several months later. You can cherry pick whatever tidbits of propaganda you wish. But your sources are a bit biased since the US was busy trying to convince the world that the two bombs they had unleashed were not "as" dangerous as some folks were then being led to believe.

The fact is, you hack, if you had the capacity to notice it: I was actually in partial (limited) agreement with some of what you have said.

But, my dance card is full, and going further with your bleating nonsense is not on the agenda.

K go make things up in another thread.

No. Again, I leave that kind of shit to you. And by all means, when pressed, please make extensive use of wikipedia.

And please continue your extensive use of zero sources

As a general rule, asswipe, when YOU use "wiki" you ARE using zero sources.

Now, when once again you have nothing worthwhile to mutter, feel compelled to hurry back, you dipshit.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Oh there was high radiation levels several months later? What level was it?

2 months after the bomb was dropped there were tens of thousands of American troops occupying both Hiroshima and Nagasaki. None of the troops had any issues with radiation.

http://www.dtra.mil/documents/ntpr/factsheets/hiroshima_and_nagasaki_occupation_forces.pdf

Now if you're going to plug your ears and whine again just say you're not interested in learning anything and we can't stop this dance.

Yes. High levels several months later. You can cherry pick whatever tidbits of propaganda you wish. But your sources are a bit biased since the US was busy trying to convince the world that the two bombs they had unleashed were not "as" dangerous as some folks were then being led to believe.

The fact is, you hack, if you had the capacity to notice it: I was actually in partial (limited) agreement with some of what you have said.

But, my dance card is full, and going further with your bleating nonsense is not on the agenda.

K go make things up in another thread.

No. Again, I leave that kind of shit to you. And by all means, when pressed, please make extensive use of wikipedia.

And please continue your extensive use of zero sources

As a general rule, asswipe, when YOU use "wiki" you ARE using zero sources.

Now, when once again you have nothing worthwhile to mutter, feel compelled to hurry back, you dipshit.

The second source is not wikipedia. And you have literally made shit up. Do you even remember what the argument was about? It was over whether nuclear bomb use could not precede an invasion because of fallout. And I proved to you that American troops were occupying Hiroshima 2 months later. In an invasion they would have been there much sooner.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Yes. High levels several months later. You can cherry pick whatever tidbits of propaganda you wish. But your sources are a bit biased since the US was busy trying to convince the world that the two bombs they had unleashed were not "as" dangerous as some folks were then being led to believe.

The fact is, you hack, if you had the capacity to notice it: I was actually in partial (limited) agreement with some of what you have said.

But, my dance card is full, and going further with your bleating nonsense is not on the agenda.

K go make things up in another thread.

No. Again, I leave that kind of shit to you. And by all means, when pressed, please make extensive use of wikipedia.

And please continue your extensive use of zero sources

As a general rule, asswipe, when YOU use "wiki" you ARE using zero sources.

Now, when once again you have nothing worthwhile to mutter, feel compelled to hurry back, you dipshit.

The second source is not wikipedia. And you have literally made shit up. Do you even remember what the argument was about? It was over whether nuclear bomb use could not precede an invasion because of fallout. And I proved to you that American troops were occupying Hiroshima 2 months later. In an invasion they would have been there much sooner.

And I pointed out to you, shitbrain, that there was still elevated radioactivity there several months later.

You can make any vapid claim you want, but that doesn't make you right.

Try to stay on the same page. Get an adult to help you out maybe.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Oh there was high radiation levels several months later? What level was it?

2 months after the bomb was dropped there were tens of thousands of American troops occupying both Hiroshima and Nagasaki. None of the troops had any issues with radiation.

http://www.dtra.mil/documents/ntpr/factsheets/hiroshima_and_nagasaki_occupation_forces.pdf

Now if you're going to plug your ears and whine again just say you're not interested in learning anything and we can't stop this dance.

Yes. High levels several months later. You can cherry pick whatever tidbits of propaganda you wish. But your sources are a bit biased since the US was busy trying to convince the world that the two bombs they had unleashed were not "as" dangerous as some folks were then being led to believe.

The fact is, you hack, if you had the capacity to notice it: I was actually in partial (limited) agreement with some of what you have said.

But, my dance card is full, and going further with your bleating nonsense is not on the agenda.

K go make things up in another thread.

No. Again, I leave that kind of shit to you. And by all means, when pressed, please make extensive use of wikipedia.

And please continue your extensive use of zero sources

As a general rule, asswipe, when YOU use "wiki" you ARE using zero sources.

Now, when once again you have nothing worthwhile to mutter, feel compelled to hurry back, you dipshit.

The second source is not wikipedia. And you have literally made shit up. Do you even remember what the argument was about? It was over whether nuclear bomb use could not precede an invasion because of fallout. And I proved to you that American troops were occupying Hiroshima 2 months later. In an invasion they would have been there much sooner.

K go make things up in another thread.

No. Again, I leave that kind of shit to you. And by all means, when pressed, please make extensive use of wikipedia.

And please continue your extensive use of zero sources

As a general rule, asswipe, when YOU use "wiki" you ARE using zero sources.

Now, when once again you have nothing worthwhile to mutter, feel compelled to hurry back, you dipshit.

The second source is not wikipedia. And you have literally made shit up. Do you even remember what the argument was about? It was over whether nuclear bomb use could not precede an invasion because of fallout. And I proved to you that American troops were occupying Hiroshima 2 months later. In an invasion they would have been there much sooner.

And I pointed out to you, shitbrain, that there was still elevated radioactivity there several months later.

You can make any vapid claim you want, but that doesn't make you right.

Try to stay on the same page. Get an adult to help you out maybe.

Then you should have no problem sourcing it! But you're making it up!

 

[Antares]

Well that settles it then..the path to peace is give everyone 100 nukes at least.....jobs. Jobs. Jobs

No one is giving anyone anything. For someone so concerned about the Bomb you seem to be remarkably ignorant of the politics of owning one.

You are remarkably ignorant of Iranian motivation. (which is religious in nature)

 

[Antares]

Yes. High levels several months later. You can cherry pick whatever tidbits of propaganda you wish. But your sources are a bit biased since the US was busy trying to convince the world that the two bombs they had unleashed were not "as" dangerous as some folks were then being led to believe.

The fact is, you hack, if you had the capacity to notice it: I was actually in partial (limited) agreement with some of what you have said.

But, my dance card is full, and going further with your bleating nonsense is not on the agenda.

K go make things up in another thread.

No. Again, I leave that kind of shit to you. And by all means, when pressed, please make extensive use of wikipedia.

And please continue your extensive use of zero sources

As a general rule, asswipe, when YOU use "wiki" you ARE using zero sources.

Now, when once again you have nothing worthwhile to mutter, feel compelled to hurry back, you dipshit.

The second source is not wikipedia. And you have literally made shit up. Do you even remember what the argument was about? It was over whether nuclear bomb use could not precede an invasion because of fallout. And I proved to you that American troops were occupying Hiroshima 2 months later. In an invasion they would have been there much sooner.

No. Again, I leave that kind of shit to you. And by all means, when pressed, please make extensive use of wikipedia.

And please continue your extensive use of zero sources

As a general rule, asswipe, when YOU use "wiki" you ARE using zero sources.

Now, when once again you have nothing worthwhile to mutter, feel compelled to hurry back, you dipshit.

The second source is not wikipedia. And you have literally made shit up. Do you even remember what the argument was about? It was over whether nuclear bomb use could not precede an invasion because of fallout. And I proved to you that American troops were occupying Hiroshima 2 months later. In an invasion they would have been there much sooner.

And I pointed out to you, shitbrain, that there was still elevated radioactivity there several months later.

You can make any vapid claim you want, but that doesn't make you right.

Try to stay on the same page. Get an adult to help you out maybe.

Then you should have no problem sourcing it! But you're making it up!

". In an invasion they would have been there much sooner."

Um....we would have lost huge numbers of Men in an invasion, and we would have still been fighting MONTHS later.

 

[TheOldSchool]

K go make things up in another thread.

No. Again, I leave that kind of shit to you. And by all means, when pressed, please make extensive use of wikipedia.

And please continue your extensive use of zero sources

As a general rule, asswipe, when YOU use "wiki" you ARE using zero sources.

Now, when once again you have nothing worthwhile to mutter, feel compelled to hurry back, you dipshit.

The second source is not wikipedia. And you have literally made shit up. Do you even remember what the argument was about? It was over whether nuclear bomb use could not precede an invasion because of fallout. And I proved to you that American troops were occupying Hiroshima 2 months later. In an invasion they would have been there much sooner.

And please continue your extensive use of zero sources

As a general rule, asswipe, when YOU use "wiki" you ARE using zero sources.

Now, when once again you have nothing worthwhile to mutter, feel compelled to hurry back, you dipshit.

The second source is not wikipedia. And you have literally made shit up. Do you even remember what the argument was about? It was over whether nuclear bomb use could not precede an invasion because of fallout. And I proved to you that American troops were occupying Hiroshima 2 months later. In an invasion they would have been there much sooner.

And I pointed out to you, shitbrain, that there was still elevated radioactivity there several months later.

You can make any vapid claim you want, but that doesn't make you right.

Try to stay on the same page. Get an adult to help you out maybe.

Then you should have no problem sourcing it! But you're making it up!

". In an invasion they would have been there much sooner."

Um....we would have lost huge numbers of Men in an invasion, and we would have still been fighting MONTHS later.

That's not even close to the point.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Yeah... What the FUCK?

"EVERYONE KNOWS" that just because a country is long known to have used HUMAN BOMBS to target large numbers of innocent people, as a means to invoke FEAR!

That this is NO REASON to believe that they're any more likely to use Nuclear Weapons on the people they targeted with human bombs... than those who do not use human bombs.

PUHLEASE! What is with all this SCARE MONGERING?

(The Reader should read the above knowing full well that such is steeped in profound, unmitigated SARCASM...

As only the most PROFOUND FOOLS WOULD CONSIDER FOR A SECOND, ALLOWING IRAN TO GET ANYWHERE NEAR NUCLEAR ANYTHING. )

 

[Antares]

No. Again, I leave that kind of shit to you. And by all means, when pressed, please make extensive use of wikipedia.

And please continue your extensive use of zero sources

As a general rule, asswipe, when YOU use "wiki" you ARE using zero sources.

Now, when once again you have nothing worthwhile to mutter, feel compelled to hurry back, you dipshit.

The second source is not wikipedia. And you have literally made shit up. Do you even remember what the argument was about? It was over whether nuclear bomb use could not precede an invasion because of fallout. And I proved to you that American troops were occupying Hiroshima 2 months later. In an invasion they would have been there much sooner.

As a general rule, asswipe, when YOU use "wiki" you ARE using zero sources.

Now, when once again you have nothing worthwhile to mutter, feel compelled to hurry back, you dipshit.

The second source is not wikipedia. And you have literally made shit up. Do you even remember what the argument was about? It was over whether nuclear bomb use could not precede an invasion because of fallout. And I proved to you that American troops were occupying Hiroshima 2 months later. In an invasion they would have been there much sooner.

And I pointed out to you, shitbrain, that there was still elevated radioactivity there several months later.

You can make any vapid claim you want, but that doesn't make you right.

Try to stay on the same page. Get an adult to help you out maybe.

Then you should have no problem sourcing it! But you're making it up!

". In an invasion they would have been there much sooner."

Um....we would have lost huge numbers of Men in an invasion, and we would have still been fighting MONTHS later.

That's not even close to the point.

The point is that you made a silly statement and you were called on it.

Invading the Japanese mainland would not have been an easy thing.

Frankly they started it and we finished it, there was no point in an invasion.

 

[TheOldSchool]

And please continue your extensive use of zero sources

As a general rule, asswipe, when YOU use "wiki" you ARE using zero sources.

Now, when once again you have nothing worthwhile to mutter, feel compelled to hurry back, you dipshit.

The second source is not wikipedia. And you have literally made shit up. Do you even remember what the argument was about? It was over whether nuclear bomb use could not precede an invasion because of fallout. And I proved to you that American troops were occupying Hiroshima 2 months later. In an invasion they would have been there much sooner.

The second source is not wikipedia. And you have literally made shit up. Do you even remember what the argument was about? It was over whether nuclear bomb use could not precede an invasion because of fallout. And I proved to you that American troops were occupying Hiroshima 2 months later. In an invasion they would have been there much sooner.

And I pointed out to you, shitbrain, that there was still elevated radioactivity there several months later.

You can make any vapid claim you want, but that doesn't make you right.

Try to stay on the same page. Get an adult to help you out maybe.

Then you should have no problem sourcing it! But you're making it up!

". In an invasion they would have been there much sooner."

Um....we would have lost huge numbers of Men in an invasion, and we would have still been fighting MONTHS later.

That's not even close to the point.

The point is that you made a silly statement and you were called on it.

Invading the Japanese mainland would not have been an easy thing.

Frankly they started it and we finished it, there was no point in an invasion.

It is completely beside the point. Someone earlier said that it isn't possible to use nukes in an invasion because of fallout. But it's completely possible. Earlier in the thread I said that if we'd had more nukes and the Japanese hadn't surrendered we could have been in Tokyo in weeks. So I forgot to add that we'd need more nukes to get to Hiroshima. Sue me. It's still besides the point.

 

[occupied]

Well that settles it then..the path to peace is give everyone 100 nukes at least.....jobs. Jobs. Jobs

No one is giving anyone anything. For someone so concerned about the Bomb you seem to be remarkably ignorant of the politics of owning one.

You are remarkably ignorant of Iranian motivation. (which is religious in nature)

The only things you "know" about Iran is what the people wanting to blow them up have told you. If they were as crazy as you seem to think they are Israel would be toast by now. The fact that they have not already committed national suicide by projecting their military beyond their borders means that they do know caution and have given thought to their future.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

 

[Antares]

Well that settles it then..the path to peace is give everyone 100 nukes at least.....jobs. Jobs. Jobs

No one is giving anyone anything. For someone so concerned about the Bomb you seem to be remarkably ignorant of the politics of owning one.

You are remarkably ignorant of Iranian motivation. (which is religious in nature)

The only things you "know" about Iran is what the people wanting to blow them up have told you. If they were as crazy as you seem to think they are Israel would be toast by now. The fact that they have not already committed national suicide by projecting their military beyond their borders means that they do know caution and have given thought to their future.

You are an idiot kid, my degree is in Comparative Religion.....so you lose.

They cannot yet cause the kind of chaos they believe they need to cause to bring their Imam back.

You really should stick to what you know and leave your childlike emotions on the night stand.

 

[Antares]

As a general rule, asswipe, when YOU use "wiki" you ARE using zero sources.

Now, when once again you have nothing worthwhile to mutter, feel compelled to hurry back, you dipshit.

The second source is not wikipedia. And you have literally made shit up. Do you even remember what the argument was about? It was over whether nuclear bomb use could not precede an invasion because of fallout. And I proved to you that American troops were occupying Hiroshima 2 months later. In an invasion they would have been there much sooner.

And I pointed out to you, shitbrain, that there was still elevated radioactivity there several months later.

You can make any vapid claim you want, but that doesn't make you right.

Try to stay on the same page. Get an adult to help you out maybe.

Then you should have no problem sourcing it! But you're making it up!

". In an invasion they would have been there much sooner."

Um....we would have lost huge numbers of Men in an invasion, and we would have still been fighting MONTHS later.

That's not even close to the point.

The point is that you made a silly statement and you were called on it.

Invading the Japanese mainland would not have been an easy thing.

Frankly they started it and we finished it, there was no point in an invasion.

It is completely beside the point. Someone earlier said that it isn't possible to use nukes in an invasion because of fallout. But it's completely possible. Earlier in the thread I said that if we'd had more nukes and the Japanese hadn't surrendered we could have been in Tokyo in weeks. So I forgot to add that we'd need more nukes to get to Hiroshima. Sue me. It's still besides the point.

You made the statement guy, that brought it into the conversation, you furthered the conversation by responding to my statement...that's kind of how this works

 

[occupied]

Well that settles it then..the path to peace is give everyone 100 nukes at least.....jobs. Jobs. Jobs

No one is giving anyone anything. For someone so concerned about the Bomb you seem to be remarkably ignorant of the politics of owning one.

You are remarkably ignorant of Iranian motivation. (which is religious in nature)

The only things you "know" about Iran is what the people wanting to blow them up have told you. If they were as crazy as you seem to think they are Israel would be toast by now. The fact that they have not already committed national suicide by projecting their military beyond their borders means that they do know caution and have given thought to their future.

You are an idiot kid, my degree is in Comparative Religion.....so you lose.

They cannot yet cause the kind of chaos they believe they need to cause to bring their Imam back.

You really should stick to what you know and leave your childlike emotions on the night stand.

So what religion is demanding you wish for the destruction of a country that has not done anything to us to deserve such treatment? All you have is a bunch of mistranslated, out-of-context shit from leaders who do just what your leaders do, preach a bunch of bullshit to get you fired up. Instead of trying to make a case against a deal maybe you should say why you want another war, it's what reasonable people are trying to prevent with this deal.

 

[Antares]

Well that settles it then..the path to peace is give everyone 100 nukes at least.....jobs. Jobs. Jobs

No one is giving anyone anything. For someone so concerned about the Bomb you seem to be remarkably ignorant of the politics of owning one.

You are remarkably ignorant of Iranian motivation. (which is religious in nature)

The only things you "know" about Iran is what the people wanting to blow them up have told you. If they were as crazy as you seem to think they are Israel would be toast by now. The fact that they have not already committed national suicide by projecting their military beyond their borders means that they do know caution and have given thought to their future.

You are an idiot kid, my degree is in Comparative Religion.....so you lose.

They cannot yet cause the kind of chaos they believe they need to cause to bring their Imam back.

You really should stick to what you know and leave your childlike emotions on the night stand.

So what religion is demanding you wish for the destruction of a country that has not done anything to us to deserve such treatment? All you have is a bunch of mistranslated, out-of-context shit from leaders who do just what your leaders do, preach a bunch of bullshit to get you fired up. Instead of trying to make a case against a deal maybe you should say why you want another war, it's what reasonable people are trying to prevent with this deal.

I have an education, you don't have anything.

The fact is this, you don't have any idea as to what you are talking about, you know nothing of Islam as I have shown again and again.

Your ego will not allow you to see how silly you look here son, and trust me...you look silly.

Whether you like it or not there are people out there who ACTUALLY think that a devastating world war is what is need to bring back their messiah.