Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   US thinking about resuming underground nuclear testing   ( divider line
    More: Cool  
•       •       •

2585 clicks; posted to Main » on 08 Jan 2002 at 8:10 AM (15 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

342 Comments     (+0 »)

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Newest | Show all

2002-01-08 08:11:40 AM  
Fark isn't right wing, no siree bob! :)

2002-01-08 08:15:08 AM  
In other news, Viagra sales in US plummet.
2002-01-08 08:18:46 AM  
Nah we're middle of the road. I've got 10 dumbest conservatives of the week set to run at midnight
2002-01-08 08:18:49 AM  
Whats wrong with nukes I say!

Lets test them above ground, perhaps in the Virgin Islands?
2002-01-08 08:19:23 AM  
stupid headline.
2002-01-08 08:19:46 AM  
Who the hell put a 'Cool' tag on this? This should be marked SCARY.
2002-01-08 08:20:58 AM  
Slight change of headline there I see.
2002-01-08 08:21:00 AM  
Eh, the hippies can get the wad out of their panties with a depleted uranium shell . . .
2002-01-08 08:21:52 AM  
Where do you live 9/10?

Is it suitable for a wee test.
2002-01-08 08:22:58 AM  
Fumanshu - my thoughts exactly.
2002-01-08 08:23:13 AM  
[image from too old to be available]
2002-01-08 08:24:17 AM  
Errr, why do they need to test them? surely they KNOW they work... I'm sure that Nuclear 'testing' is definitely big boys playing with their big toys...
2002-01-08 08:26:11 AM  
If anyone is ever stuoid enough to fire the things lets all hope thet dont work!
2002-01-08 08:26:35 AM  
nukes suck. lets do some REAL fighting. bring back sticks and stones, i say! to hell with modern day weaponry! fight like MEN dammit! put up your dukes and sucker punch the baddies!!! fun fun fun!!
2002-01-08 08:28:23 AM  
Yeah - you'd think that with all the money invested in them, they don't need to be tested. It would be like testing matches:

Does this work?


Yeah. Cool.

*Strikes stub*

Oh, it seems to have stopped now. Better test another.
2002-01-08 08:28:27 AM  
Bush keeps digging himself deeper...and deeper...and deeper into the one-term grave. Is he just not aware of how extremist he's becoming?

Not smart if you wanna get elected in three years there, bucko.
2002-01-08 08:28:48 AM  
a little thought and bad HTML, that is.
2002-01-08 08:29:10 AM  
What ever you do don't piss off America.


take that rest of the world, that's how dedicated America is to global peace.
2002-01-08 08:29:55 AM  
First talk of low yeild tactical weapons, now a resumption of nuclear testing...
Does it bother anyone the company we're keeping in not signing the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty? (India, Pakistan, China, North Korea...)
Slowly but surely, we descend to the gates of Hell.
2002-01-08 08:30:18 AM  
The problem is that radiation is no great respector of national borders.

Nuke over there today, watch your kids die of cancer tomorrow.
2002-01-08 08:31:17 AM  
The real problem is, we're getting closer and closer to thinking it might be okay to use a few of them.
2002-01-08 08:33:03 AM  
Simian03, your'e not the first person to have that sticks and stones thought. After the first atomic weapons were dropped on Japan, a journalist asked Einstein what the third world war would be fought with. He replied that he didn't know about the third, but he assured them that the fourth world war would be fought with sticks and stones.
2002-01-08 08:34:41 AM  
Heh, big bombs are a guy thing.... I plan on pulling up a lawn chair and watching the fireworks!
2002-01-08 08:34:50 AM  
Sticks and stones may break my bones but it's worth it just for the rush of chopping people into pieces.
2002-01-08 08:43:23 AM  
[image from too old to be available]
2002-01-08 08:47:03 AM  
That is NOT cool, that is scary.

USA is turning in the wrong direction, away from everyone else.
2002-01-08 08:47:05 AM  
"The real problem is, we're getting closer and closer to thinking it might be okay to use a few of them."

Good point - wasn't it Rumsfeld who said that nothing was off the table when they attacked Afghanistan? And some "serious" political commentators actually suggested nuking Afghanistan, a country where a camel is considered heavy armour. The US managed to destroy their government in less than 3 months.

If the USA wants a nuke or (a real) bio terrorist incident, just continue this foreign polucy and its bound to happen.
2002-01-08 08:48:13 AM  
I for one support resumption of tests. When it comes time for WWIII I want to make sure that our weapons work properly.
2002-01-08 08:48:48 AM  
Let's face facts, folks. When it comes to nukes, we can't afford to live in some dream world where nukes just go away like some feather in the wind. Like it or not, the nukes are out there and they are here to stay. It behooves the United States to maintain its nuke arsenal and protect its population in the face of other nations who would like to destroy the USA(and do you REALLY think that China WOULDN'T destroy the USA if it had the opportunity?). Yes, nukes are scary - but because of them, the world has not gone through World War III. Do you REALLY think that if the USA had not owned a nuke arsenal it would have NOT been attacked by the Soviets during the Cold War? Nukes make the price of some nation's decision to go to war against the USA almost intolerably high - and no nation has been willing to pay the nuke price for going to war with the USA. Is that such a BAD thing?

Have you ever heard of PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH?? Or does that make you choke on your morning designer coffee?

Where do you live 9/10? Is it suitable for a wee test.

You sure did show a lot of liberal "love" and "tolerance" in that remark. You aren't practicing what liberals preach . . . why didn't you say, "I disagee with your comment, but I respect your right to say it." So much for liberal "love" and "tolerance." Sheesh.
2002-01-08 08:52:30 AM  
9/10 why did you link to a definition of behooves?

Anyways, Im not gonna fool myself into believe America isnt dumb enough to start testing nuclear weapons again... im gonna go join greenpeace now, and hope for the best.
2002-01-08 08:54:25 AM  
9/10: Are you thinking of the "War is Peace" theory from 1984, perhaps? Perpetual war is more peaceful as everyone's used to it and it generally happens to other people far, far away, but is a useful tool for managing a society as it provides a focus point for common hate.
2002-01-08 08:55:06 AM  
I hear there is some mighty nice deal on property in Afganistan
2002-01-08 08:57:46 AM  
Guys, the geniuses that make nuclear warheads are the same guys who make Windows XP and Firestone Tires.

I guess that is why they need testing.
2002-01-08 08:59:05 AM  
Surely a successful test of a nuclear weapon means an increase in the likliehood of the remaining weapons being duds?

Oh, and this was a rhetorical question, so any statisticians dashing to prove me wrong can sod off and get real jobs.
2002-01-08 09:00:45 AM  
Grivas: "Microsoft Nuke" definitely sounds good.

"Where Do You Want To Vapourise Today?"
2002-01-08 09:01:09 AM  
Minmei: Because someone was sure to ask about it.

Goatman264: No, that's not what I'm thinking. I'm thinking that the THREAT of being obliterated is enough to keep world war from breaking out again. Again, if the USA didn't have nukes during the Cold Way and the Soviets did have them, what would have stopped them from firing their nukes off and obliterating not just the USA but all of Western Europe? Absolutely nothing would have stopped them from doing it - because they would have known there was no way the USA and its allies could have retaliated in kind.
2002-01-08 09:02:31 AM  
err, I should have typed "Cold War," not "Cold Way." Farking typos . . .
2002-01-08 09:02:34 AM  
As a liberal I can firmly say that I have no love or tolerance for anyone who thinks nuclear weapons are anything but a vrey very bad idea.
2002-01-08 09:03:15 AM  
I aint a liberal 9/11

So if you are right, and peace can only come through strenth, you are all in favour of Iraq, N.Korea and Iran having nuclear weapons then. After all its the only way to prevent war isnt it.
2002-01-08 09:03:17 AM  
One problem here is the choice of test sites. Nevada. Why nuke underneath Nevada? Isn't that just a bit close to the San Andreas faultline? Why aren't numerous flashing red lights going off at this thought? How about, "Warning Will Robinson. Warning! Warning!"

Now, if you were to "test" those nukes at a different site, say... along the fault lines in the mountains of Afghanistan, who's to say that a little unforseen earthquake of devastating proportions might not work out to someone's advantage?
2002-01-08 09:04:23 AM  
i've become so pro-nuclear war over the last three or four months, it's not funny. humans are so fakring stoopid, let's clear the table and start again, shall we.

er, make that 'global thermonuclear war'...start w/ Texas and move east until you get back around to Cali, if you don't mind. thanks guys, i know you won't let me down.
2002-01-08 09:05:54 AM  
9/10: It's exactly the type of thinking, MAD (mutually assured destruction), that is plunging not just us, but all of humanity into the dark ages. I'm not arguing with you that people would like to blow us to kingdom come, but I think it would certainly cause leaders and officials to rethink their foreign policies. It's a damned shame that whenever a conflict arises, no one can be man enough to step up, admit error, and work towards a resolution. The result is always the same: blow 'em up! We think we are sooooo civilzed, the culmination of millions of years of evolution, yet we are the only species on the planet that has the ability to obliterate all life.
2002-01-08 09:07:13 AM  
So what was the point of the ASCI then?

Dumbass W Bush!
2002-01-08 09:08:30 AM  
Dont be hard on 9/11 he belives that until everyone has a personal nuclear weapon then no-one is safe.

After all if your neigbour wants to kill you WHAT IS GOING TO PREVENT THEM unless we all have nukes?

If only Vietnam had had the bomb, all that messy war could have been avoided.

2002-01-08 09:08:56 AM  

You're stuck in the past. Think about the present and future.
2002-01-08 09:10:11 AM  
Harmonia, Iraq, North Korea, and Iran have proven that they are not responsible enough to own nukes. Look at their histories. Iraq and Iran used nerve agents against each other during their eight-year war, and they would have used nukes against each other if they had owned them. Don't you think North Korea would have used nukes against the South during the Korean War if they had owned them at that time? Those nations are controlled by rogue, uncivilized, provocative people whose goal is conquest, not living in peace with their neighbors.
2002-01-08 09:10:26 AM  
Cmon Ransom he is being brave

Openly advocating that Iraq be given a nuke is pretty impressive.
2002-01-08 09:12:06 AM  
9/10: So you'd like to be in a perpetual cold war, then? Irag build more arms, US does. India does. Pakistan does. China does.

More enemies now.


Pretty fireworks.
2002-01-08 09:12:19 AM  
Well lets ban any country from having nukes if they have ever used them.

Sounds fair enough to me.

The US govt wants to live in peace?

Go telll Afganistan, iraq, somalia etc........
2002-01-08 09:18:23 AM  
So does this mean it would be OK for other countries to slap sanctions on us if we test them? Because we sure as hell slapped sanctions on India and Pakistan for carrying out underground nuclear tests. If it is bad for them to do it, what makes it so right for us to do it? It's back to that "we're a sovereign nation, so don't tell us what to do...but we will tell you what to do."
Displayed 50 of 342 comments

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Newest | Show all

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.

In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.