|
Random Politics & Religion #00
By Bloodrose 2015-01-23 18:00:18
I would have to agree with Kara.
Let them kill the hostages first before dropping a nuke on them at least.
(not really, I don't want to deal with that fallout ***) the hype of fallout the severely over exaggerated due to cold war fears and Hollywood, just an fyi. Nuclear fallout - as witnessed with the first of the atomic bombs, is not even remotely exaggerated by the cold war, or Hollywood.
By Jetackuu 2015-01-23 18:10:35
I would have to agree with Kara.
Let them kill the hostages first before dropping a nuke on them at least.
(not really, I don't want to deal with that fallout ***) the hype of fallout the severely over exaggerated due to cold war fears and Hollywood, just an fyi. Nuclear fallout - as witnessed with the first of the atomic bombs, is not even remotely exaggerated by the cold war, or Hollywood. Just going to have to disagree with you, while there is affects of air-burst fission explosions, they're not as bad as most would think.
I mean there's some that still think that nobody can or lives in Hiroshima and Nagasaki today.
Quote: Perhaps most reassuring of this is the view of the cityscapes themselves. Among some there is the unfounded fear that Hiroshima and Nagasaki are still radioactive; in reality, this is not true. Following a nuclear explosion, there are two forms of residual radioactivity. The first is the fallout of the nuclear material and fission products. Most of this was dispersed in the atmosphere or blown away by the wind. Though some did fall onto the city as black rain, the level of radioactivity today is so low it can be barely distinguished from the trace amounts presents throughout the world as a result of atmospheric tests in the 1950s and 1960s. The other form of radiation is neutron activation. Neutrons can cause non-radioactive materials to become radioactive when caught by atomic nuclei. However, since the bombs were detonated so far above the ground, there was very little contamination—especially in contrast to nuclear test sites such as those in Nevada. In fact, nearly all the induced radioactivity decayed within a few days of the explosions.
Yeah, severely over exaggerated.
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-01-23 18:12:31
I would have to agree with Kara.
Let them kill the hostages first before dropping a nuke on them at least.
(not really, I don't want to deal with that fallout ***) the hype of fallout the severely over exaggerated due to cold war fears and Hollywood, just an fyi. Nuclear fallout - as witnessed with the first of the atomic bombs, is not even remotely exaggerated by the cold war, or Hollywood. I guess this doesn't exist in Jet's mind
Quote: Short term:
The dose that would be lethal to 50% of a population is a common parameter used to compare the effects of various fallout types or circumstances. Usually, the term is defined for a specific time, and limited to studies of acute lethality. The common time periods used are 30 days or less for most small laboratory animals and to 60 days for large animals and humans. The LD50 figure assumes that the individuals did not receive other injuries or medical treatment.
In the 1950s, the LD50 for gamma rays was set at 3.5 Gy, while under more dire conditions of war (a bad diet, little medical care, poor nursing) the LD50 was 2.5 Gy (250 rad). There have been few documented cases of survival beyond 6 Gy. One person at Chernobyl survived a dose of more than 10 Gy, but many of the persons exposed there were not uniformly exposed over their entire body. If a person is exposed in a non-homogeneous manner then a given dose (averaged over the entire body) is less likely to be lethal. For instance, if a person gets a hand/low arm dose of 100 Gy, which gives them an overall dose of 4 Gy, they are more likely to survive than a person who gets a 4 Gy dose over their entire body. A hand dose of 10 Gy or more would likely result in loss of the hand. A British industrial radiographer who got a lifetime hand dose of 100 Gy lost his hand because of radiation dermatitis[citation needed]. Most people become ill after an exposure to 1 Gy or more. The fetuses of pregnant women are often more vulnerable to radiation and may miscarry, especially in the first trimester.
One hour after a surface burst, the radiation from fallout in the crater region is 30 grays per hour (Gy/h)[clarification needed]. Civilian dose rates in peacetime range from 30 to 100 µGy per year.
Fallout radiation decays exponentially relatively quickly with time. Most areas become fairly safe for travel and decontamination after three to five weeks.[citation needed]
For yields of up to 10 kt, prompt radiation is the dominant producer of casualties on the battlefield. Humans receiving an acute incapacitating dose (30 Gy) have their performance degraded almost immediately and become ineffective within several hours. However, they do not die until five to six days after exposure, assuming they do not receive any other injuries. Individuals receiving less than a total of 1.5 Gy are not incapacitated. People receiving doses greater than 1.5 Gy become disabled, and some eventually die.
A dose of 5.3 Gy to 8.3 Gy is considered lethal but not immediately incapacitating. Personnel exposed to this amount of radiation have their performance degraded in two to three hours, depending on how physically demanding the tasks they must perform are, and remain in this disabled state at least two days. However, at that point they experience a recovery period and can perform non-demanding tasks for about six days, after which they relapse for about four weeks. At this time they begin exhibiting symptoms of radiation poisoning of sufficient severity to render them totally ineffective. Death follows at approximately six weeks after exposure, although outcomes may vary.
Long term:
Late or delayed effects of radiation occur following a wide range of doses and dose rates. Delayed effects may appear months to years after irradiation and include a wide variety of effects involving almost all tissues or organs. Some of the possible delayed consequences of radiation injury are life shortening, carcinogenesis, cataract formation, chronic radiodermatitis, decreased fertility, and genetic mutations.[3] Presently, the only teratological effect observed in humans following nuclear attacks on highly populated areas is microcephaly which is the only proven malformation, or congenital abnormality, found in the in utero developing human fetuses present during the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings. Of all the pregnant women exposed in the two cities, the number of children born with microcephaly was below 50.[4] No statistically demonstrable increase of congenital malformations was found among the later conceived children born to survivors of the nuclear detonations at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.[4][5][6] The surviving women of Hiroshima and Nagasaki who could conceive and were exposed to substantial amounts of radiation went on and had children with no higher incidence of abnormalities than the Japanese average.[7][8]
The Baby Tooth Survey helped to determine the effects of nuclear fallout in the human anatomy by examining the levels of radioactive material absorbed into the deciduous teeth of children. Founded by the husband and wife team of physicians Eric Reiss and Louise Reiss, the research focused on detecting the presence of strontium-90, a cancer-causing radioactive isotope created by the more than 400 atomic tests conducted above ground that is absorbed from water and dairy products into the bones and teeth given its chemical similarity to calcium. The team sent collection forms to schools in the St. Louis, Missouri area, hoping to gather 50,000 teeth each year. Ultimately, the project collected over 300,000 teeth from children of various ages before the project was ended in 1970.[9]
Preliminary results of the Baby Tooth Survey were published in the November 24, 1961, edition of the journal Science, and showed that levels of strontium 90 had risen steadily in children born in the 1950s, with those born later showing the most pronounced increases.[10] The results of a more comprehensive study of the elements found in the teeth collected showed that children born after 1963 had levels of strontium 90 in their baby teeth that was 50 times higher than that found in children born before large-scale atomic testing began. The findings helped convince U.S. President John F. Kennedy to sign the Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty with the United Kingdom and Soviet Union, which ended the above-ground nuclear weapons testing that created the greatest amounts of atmospheric nuclear fallout.
Bahamut.Omael
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 400
By Bahamut.Omael 2015-01-23 18:56:58
Guess I'll have to start saving my bottlecaps and dust off my old The Ink Spots records.
[+]
Server: Phoenix
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3686
By Phoenix.Amandarius 2015-01-24 07:18:06
The fallout from a nuclear bomb is called "peace".
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-01-24 11:59:08
Phoenix.Amandarius said: »The fallout from a nuclear bomb is called "peace". The political fallout from a nuclear bomb is called "The Second Cold War."
Server: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 10394
By Lakshmi.Sparthosx 2015-01-24 12:16:08
The fallout of a nuclear weapon being detonated isn't the physical effects but the psychological and economic.
Also, nukes have come quite a ways since Little Boy and Fat Man. Funny enough, Americans have this sick obsession with nuking people. Pretty sad.
[+]
Lakshmi.Zerowone
Server: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 6949
By Lakshmi.Zerowone 2015-01-24 12:35:47
[+]
Bahamut.Ravael
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 13622
By Bahamut.Ravael 2015-01-24 12:37:04
Black Rain, look it up.
edit: Not the movie but what occurs after a nuclear detonation.
Chocolate Rain, look it up.
[+]
Lakshmi.Zerowone
Server: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 6949
By Lakshmi.Zerowone 2015-01-24 12:39:00
hahah very funny but people talking about fallout and not mentioning black rain is more funny.
Bismarck.Ihina
Server: Bismarck
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3187
By Bismarck.Ihina 2015-01-24 14:05:01
Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: »Funny enough, Americans have this sick obsession with nuking people. Pretty sad.
I like to think that it's the legislation-via-***-swinging folks are the ones who have an obsession with nuking people.
Seems to be a fraction of the country who believe murder is always the answer, and they forgot the question.
VIP
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9534
By Odin.Jassik 2015-01-24 14:06:44
Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: »Funny enough, Americans have this sick obsession with nuking people. Pretty sad.
I like to think that it's the legislation-via-***-swinging folks are the ones who have an obsession with nuking people.
Seems to be a fraction of the country who believe murder is always the answer, and they forgot the question.
Uh, in case you haven't noticed, this is 'Murica... Even the liberals love guns and bombs.
Bismarck.Ihina
Server: Bismarck
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3187
By Bismarck.Ihina 2015-01-24 14:19:00
Well there's love, then there's obsess over.
VIP
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9534
By Odin.Jassik 2015-01-24 14:30:03
There is still very little opposition to aggression. Even the most radical liberal president ever is firing off hellfire missiles they've got the shelf life of organic milk.
Some measure of sarcasm should be obvious.
By Altimaomega 2015-01-24 14:31:56
Well there's love, then there's obsess over.
Lets just destroy all our weapons and the world will be a peaceful place, right?
VIP
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9534
By Odin.Jassik 2015-01-24 14:36:01
Well there's love, then there's obsess over.
Lets just destroy all our weapons and the world will be a peaceful place, right?
If just having them was enough, you'd have a point, but it's sure not going to be a peaceful place if we insist on using them on every developing nation that has contrary ideas.
By Altimaomega 2015-01-24 14:36:08
There is still very little opposition to aggression. Even the most radical liberal president ever is firing off hellfire missiles they've got the shelf life of organic milk.
Some measure of sarcasm should be obvious.
??? Could have swore you go out of your way to call him conservative. I'd go looking for the posts, but I'm sure you would say that we just misunderstand what you said.
[+]
VIP
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9534
By Odin.Jassik 2015-01-24 14:37:31
There is still very little opposition to aggression. Even the most radical liberal president ever is firing off hellfire missiles they've got the shelf life of organic milk.
Some measure of sarcasm should be obvious.
??? Could have swore you go out of your way to call him conservative. I'd go looking for the posts, but I'm sure you would say that we just misunderstand what you said.
You bolded the wrong part.
Edit: I've also never called him conservative, he's moderate.
By Altimaomega 2015-01-24 14:39:01
Well there's love, then there's obsess over.
Lets just destroy all our weapons and the world will be a peaceful place, right?
If just having them was enough, you'd have a point, but it's sure not going to be a peaceful place if we insist on using them on every developing nation that has contrary ideas.
When was just having anything "enough"..? It's not so much we insist on using them either.
By Altimaomega 2015-01-24 14:40:27
There is still very little opposition to aggression. Even the most radical liberal president ever is firing off hellfire missiles they've got the shelf life of organic milk.
Some measure of sarcasm should be obvious.
??? Could have swore you go out of your way to call him conservative. I'd go looking for the posts, but I'm sure you would say that we just misunderstand what you said.
You bolded the wrong part.
Edit: I've also never called him conservative, he's moderate.
Nope, but you did.
VIP
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9534
By Odin.Jassik 2015-01-24 14:40:51
Well there's love, then there's obsess over.
Lets just destroy all our weapons and the world will be a peaceful place, right?
If just having them was enough, you'd have a point, but it's sure not going to be a peaceful place if we insist on using them on every developing nation that has contrary ideas.
When was just having anything "enough"..? It's not so much we insist on using them either.
It's been enough for the Swiss for generations. And, as far as atomic weapons, simply having them has been enough to discourage major conflicts for every nation that has them besides us.
By Altimaomega 2015-01-24 14:44:33
Well there's love, then there's obsess over.
Lets just destroy all our weapons and the world will be a peaceful place, right?
If just having them was enough, you'd have a point, but it's sure not going to be a peaceful place if we insist on using them on every developing nation that has contrary ideas.
When was just having anything "enough"..? It's not so much we insist on using them either.
It's been enough for the Swiss for generations. And, as far as atomic weapons, simply having them has been enough to discourage major conflicts for every nation that has them besides us.
Naive.
(Wrong thread but it works here just as well)
VIP
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9534
By Odin.Jassik 2015-01-24 14:45:59
This just in: It's naive to think that not bombing everyone constantly would lead to war...
[+]
By Altimaomega 2015-01-24 14:56:16
Not surprising vic likes your post because it makes zero sense.
And, as far as atomic weapons
This just in: It's naive to think that not bombing everyone constantly would lead to war...
When exactly did we start dropping nukes on "everyone" Flip flopping from point to point.. The mark of a desperate liberal.. FFS the last at least 2 pages have been about nukes and all the sudden you switch to plain ole bombs.. smh
VIP
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9534
By Odin.Jassik 2015-01-24 15:07:04
Not surprising vic likes your post because it makes zero sense.
And, as far as atomic weapons
This just in: It's naive to think that not bombing everyone constantly would lead to war...
When exactly did we start dropping nukes on "everyone" Flip flopping from point to point.. The mark of a desperate liberal.. FFS the last at least 2 pages have been about nukes and all the sudden you switch to plain ole bombs.. smh
They are 2 different thoughts, and they exist independent of each other. You can tell quite easily that they are different thoughts, because they are in different posts...
We're the only nation that's ever used an atomic weapon on another nation. The 7 or 8 other countries that have them have somehow avoided nuclear wars simply by having and not using them.
So, what is naive about my line of thought? It's impossible to avoid war without making it constantly? Do you even read what other people post before you see an avatar and instantly must disagree with them?
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-01-24 19:27:56
This just in: It's naive to think that not bombing everyone constantly would lead to war... Does it matter? It's "Damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation in regards to the world police (aka the USA) and those who have a chip on their shoulder (this time around, it's ISIS).
We drop a nuke, a war will start. Many people will die, but it will end quicker.
We don't drop a nuke, a war will eventually start. Many people will die, but not all at once.
Either way, it's the same outcome. The players involved in this upcoming war will depend on a nuke being dropped or not. Personally, I don't want to piss of Germany and the UK.
By Bloodrose 2015-01-24 20:02:25
I wouldn't want to piss off Canada, we'll send Moose bombs.
[+]
VIP
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9534
By Odin.Jassik 2015-01-24 20:09:48
This just in: It's naive to think that not bombing everyone constantly would lead to war... Does it matter? It's "Damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation in regards to the world police (aka the USA) and those who have a chip on their shoulder (this time around, it's ISIS).
We drop a nuke, a war will start. Many people will die, but it will end quicker.
We don't drop a nuke, a war will eventually start. Many people will die, but not all at once.
Either way, it's the same outcome. The players involved in this upcoming war will depend on a nuke being dropped or not. Personally, I don't want to piss of Germany and the UK.
War will happen sooner or later for any powerful nation, sure. That's no excuse for advocating bombing as the first path in any disagreement between nations. As well, who do you expect to pay for it? Is it perfectly fine to spend nearly a trillion dollars a year bombing brown people when we "can't afford" to take care of the veterans we already have, much less the ones we'll create?
Server: Shiva
Game: FFXI
Posts: 8022
By Shiva.Viciousss 2015-01-24 22:06:30
Does it matter? It's "Damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation in regards to the world police (aka the USA) and those who have a chip on their shoulder (this time around, it's ISIS).
We drop a nuke, a war will start. Many people will die, but it will end quicker.
We don't drop a nuke, a war will eventually start. Many people will die, but not all at once.
Either way, it's the same outcome. The players involved in this upcoming war will depend on a nuke being dropped or not. Personally, I don't want to piss of Germany and the UK.
There is zero guarantee the act of dropping a nuke will bring a quick end to a war. Not just that, who cares about pissing off the UK? The chances of the UK using a nuke on their own are pretty much zero. And lastly, Germany does not have nukes, so the chances of them using one is definitely zero.
By Blazed1979 2015-01-25 13:47:15
Putin's Revenge
Quote: This is probably one of the most important editorials you’ll read in 2015, and I mean it with every sense of earnestness. But first, let us set the facts and numbers, which you won’t find as direct and complete elsewhere. Europe imports around 36% of its natural gas from Russia, which in turn exports 60% of it through Ukraine. The other 40%, Russia exports through Belarus, Latvia and Finland. When Russia supported the separatists in Ukraine, the US and Europe responded with some tough sanctions against the Russians. This week, Russian president Vladimir Putin ordered that Russian gas to Ukraine be stopped, accusing the latter of stealing it. The end result is that Europe just lost 22% of its total natural gas supply overnight. Now the details.
Obviously, Putin has launched his own revenge agenda, and as usual he’s playing it smartly by the book. He didn’t cut Russian gas passing through any other country, or otherwise, he would be officially declaring World War 3, and he’s too smart to do that. Instead, he picked the same country, which the Americans and the Europeans are claiming to defend, i.e. the cause of the problem, and which happens to handle the majority of Russian gas exports. Instead, Putin is offering the West Russian gas through Turkey, and with infrastructure not ready yet, the Europeans have to wait; let alone the infrastructure between Turkey and the rest of Europe. Do I hear anyone calling for Turkey’s inclusion to the EU? Well, let’s first take Erdoğan’s opinion on this.
And if you think this is all what’s Putin been preparing for the West, you’d be terribly wrong. The Russian president, this week, also ordered the liquidation of Russia’s dollar dominated assets fund. He is now selling nearly 100 billion U.S. Dollar worth of Western assets, and what is he doing with the cash? Aha, he is first rescuing his ailing Russian Ruble, and second, he’s buying dirt cheap Russian energy stocks from their Western shareholders! The Russian stock market, which lost 35% of its value in December 2014, tempted the Russian president to bring those energy shares back home at less than half the price they were originally sold for. Smart enough? Read on, it’s not over yet!
Russia has been accumulating physical gold since 2005. Oh wait, this is when Putin served his first presidential era! Indeed, and now during his second presidency, he has tripled his country’s gold reserves, so what’s the trick? Simple, the Russian leader is moving closer to back his Ruble with physical gold. He first hiked the key interest rate from 10% to 17%, then he gave state-owned companies until March 2015 to bring down their foreign exchange balances to their October 2014 levels. This last move translates into tens of billions of U.S. Dollars being sold for Rubles in the coming few weeks. And eventually, he looks set to back the Russian currency with gold.
And as if natural gas and gold were not enough of a revenge, Putin added oil to his arsenal. This oil price war started with both the Americans and the Saudis triggering it in defense of the U.S. currency and in an attempt to bring Russia – the world’s second largest oil exporter – to its knees. So how exactly did president Putin respond to this? He is selling Russian oil for physical gold! In other words, he is pulling Russia out of the Petrodollar market, and hence exposing the U.S. currency to a disastrous outcome. Consequently, what started as an attempt to bring Russia to its knees, could very possibly end with the U.S., Europe and the rest of the world except China on their knees instead.
The best thing I read on Vladimir Putin, which actually led me to burst into laughter was what Russian lawyer Dmitry Kalinichenko wrote few days ago, when he described the case as follows: “Very few people understand what Putin is doing at the moment. And almost no one understands what he will do in the future”. I definitely agree! So what should you be doing as this geopolitical financial war escalates? One thing! Buy silver and gold, and reread our “Gold.. is there hope?” and “Silver: Pick of the Year 2015” editorials before you go.
[+]
Random Politics & Religion is for topics that aren't thread worthy on their own and do not have their own existing thread.
Rules and Guidelines
Forum Rules and P&R Section Guidelines still apply.
Satire is tolerated.
If your topic covers a story over 6 months old (Watergate, Benghazi, 2012 Election, etc.) post it here.
Discussions on racism, homophobia, transphobia, and the like are allowed, targeted insults based on these will not be tolerated.
Political debates get heated and are meant to be intense, if you take offense to being called or proven wrong, you don't belong here.
If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen; if you prove you can't handle the criticism you bring upon yourself in this thread, you may be removed from it. You are responsible for what you post.
Along those lines, heat is fine, but sustained, clearly personal hostility is not okay. The personal attack rules still apply. Attack positions, not posters. Failure to adhere to this will result in your removal from the thread.
This thread is NOT the Flame Core.
These rules are subject to change and modification where and when needed.
Random Politics & Religion may be mained or demained depending on the activity within at a Moderator's discretion.
With that out of the way, let the debates begin!
/bow
|
|