Comments on: Father of Neutron Bomb, “The Most Moral Weapon,” Dies

By: cung mua

cung mua — Fri, 29 Jul 2011 11:01:24 +0000

Thanks on your marvelous posting! I truly enjoyed reading it, you happen to be a great author.I will remember to bookmark your blog and will come back later on. I want to encourage you to definitely continue your great work, have a nice weekend!

By: Uncle B

Uncle B — Mon, 27 Dec 2010 17:44:40 +0000

Too bad, Yankee Doodle wasted his time and money on Neutron bombs instead of Solar, Wind, Wave, Hydro, Tidal or Geothermal energy sources! Soon, the suppliers of oil will be exhausted, but first they face slowed flows,The Burgeoning Asian demand for oil will not help! Expect oil prices to soar! Soon!
China knows this! They have faced this reality! they open thirty new Nuclear reactors this year!
If the $650 Billions of dollars spent kicking Saddam’s ass were to have been spent developing Thermal Solar (conventional) plants in the American South West, America would be prospering with energy surpluses today!

By: suniti

suniti — Wed, 15 Dec 2010 11:33:40 +0000

The neutron bomb is a moral/ clean bomb but it is very difficult to produce. Its maintainance has high costs as Tritium half life is very short.
Thence this bomb is not very feasible.
And it does harm the infrastructure

By: Brian Too

Brian Too — Tue, 07 Dec 2010 00:19:26 +0000

Always going to be a tough sell, the concept of a ‘moral weapon’, whether in relative or absolute terms, when that weapon causes death and injury. Quite honestly it doesn’t seem like a point worth making when it is so fundamentally flawed.

If you want a moral weapon, create something that changes peoples minds.

By: Howard

Howard — Mon, 06 Dec 2010 21:26:43 +0000

The fly in the neutron bomb use is this: Once the weapon is used to destroy the human occupants of a city, you couldn’t really occupy or use that city unless you were prepared to quickly remove all the corpses before they decomposed and spread disease.

By: Ed H.

Ed H. — Mon, 06 Dec 2010 20:21:51 +0000

@Richard, Hear hear. Too many ultra-right-wingers DO think Democrats are Hitler, though.

(Note I said “ultra-right-wingers”, *NOT* “conservative Republican”.)

By: Htos1

Htos1 — Mon, 06 Dec 2010 14:09:05 +0000

It’s dangerously naive to have dismantled these weaons.Do you think other nations are now just going to play kissy face because we did this?Especially since the gay attack of Wikileaks?

By: scanner

scanner — Sun, 05 Dec 2010 03:30:19 +0000

@William. I am astonished to learn neither R. Reagan (Grenada, War on Drugs) nor G.W. Bush (Afghanistan, Iraq, War on Terror) are Republicans.
But I guess, as John Churchill said, “If you wish war, you must first elect the peace party”

By: Richard Townsend

Richard Townsend — Sun, 05 Dec 2010 01:51:04 +0000

I’m tired of every article written becoming politicized in the comments section. I am a conservative Republican (mentioned only so none will think I am a Democrat apologist) and don’t think the Emperor of Japan was a Democrat, nor was Hitler.

By: William52

William52 — Sun, 05 Dec 2010 00:41:31 +0000

“I believe the Russians also called it “The Republican Bomb”.”

Not surprisingly the “good” bomb would be identified with Republicans. Democrats prefer naplam, burn baby burn.

The Republican identification with a good bomb as opposed to a dirty bomb is of course because no Republican ever presided over starting a war in the 20th century. Generally Republicans have to clean up the wars Democrats start. Obama will start a war with Iran before he leave office, after Iran nukes Tel Aviv. A Republican will have to clean up Obama’s, a Democrat’s mess yet again.

By: Kate

Kate — Sat, 04 Dec 2010 09:46:44 +0000

Not much point in killing everyone if you can’t get their stuff afterwards.

By: Woof

Woof — Fri, 03 Dec 2010 23:42:55 +0000

Fallout pretty much results from the weapon’s fireball reaching the ground. Neutron warheads would be employed for an area effect, thus an airburst, thus low/no fallout.

By: DJD

DJD — Fri, 03 Dec 2010 22:12:48 +0000

How exactly was this supposed to be morally superior to chemical or biological weapons?? (Actually, it is essentially a type of chemical WMD, seems to me.)

Also: Were the fallout dangers expected to be different from your standard nuclear weapon?

By: JMW

JMW — Fri, 03 Dec 2010 20:34:30 +0000

I believe the Russians also called it “The Republican Bomb”.