Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
On Sunday, April 6, 2003, Tyler came up with this... TD We could start nuking garbage dumps that are already full to make space for TD new garbage (eg, Staten Island). Radiation won't be a problem compared to TD the other toxins that have already seeped into the ground, and besides--who TD cares?--its already a garbage dump. Staten Island is too small to cope with increasing amount of garbage being generated, even if you do nuke it every few years. Why not clear out Long Island? It's full of garbage, and it's much bigger. Although, Staten Island could do with a nuke anyway. Just wait until I move first. TD -TD -- stuart Can you see the flag? Rising up beyond the smoke of dying authors, burning books, there was a problem with what they wrote. The flag is hard to read, because all flags start to look the same covered with the blood of the faithless and insane. -Operation Ivy-
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
At 04:56 PM 4/6/03 -0700, Bill Stewart wrote: A lot of these struck me as desparate attempts by the bomb designers to find *something* useful to do with the damned things besides pray that they sit in their silos, rusting, and are never, never used. Yes, that's about right... I think that is grossly unfair. They all-of-a-sudden had a several-order-of-magnitude change in the cost of explosions, and as applied scientists, looked for beneficial applications. Fact is, if the sheeple weren't so ignorant/afraid, peaceful, clean uses of nukes could benefit, e.g., excavating canals at a fraction of the cost/time of conventional work. This is economics physics, with politics smothering the whole affair. --- Of what use is a new borne babe? -Faraday
