Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (50774)	6/18/2004 5:25:06 PM
From: Ish	Respond to of 793903

<<Seems to me that a neutron bomb would be just the thing to use if you wanted to, for example, take over oil fields. Kills the defenders and leaves the oil fields.>> Like the old cobalt bombs that weren't used in Korea. No humans can enter the area for 100 years.

To: Lane3 who wrote (50774)	6/19/2004 1:59:07 AM
From: D. Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793903

Kills the defenders and leaves the oil fields. That's somewhat of a myth. You still have the nuclear blast, but a lower blast yield (couple hundred yards) and a large neutron and gamma rad yield. They were developed to stop armor, since armor can more readily resist the heat and blast effects, but the steel armor acts like a microwave oven to those inside when bombarded by high energy neutrons. The oil fields not harmed by the blast would still glow in the dark. Derek