Nuclear weapon/Talk

< Nuclear weapon

HomePage | Recent changes | View source | Discuss this page | Page history | Log in |

Printable version | Disclaimers | Privacy policy

First paragraph refers to different weapons as it if were different names for the same thing. The merging-refactoring of several articles was not very well done, needs work.

Since when is 1MT a very small nuclear bomb? Or is that a section yet to be written?

I think historically it is not big, while modern weapons usually operate in the 100-500KT range they have gone as high as 60MT. Hiroshima was 15KT and Nagasaki was 21KT but the first 'real' H-bomb (October 1952) yielded 10MT.

Changed the reference to Japanese bomb during WWII to reflect usenet discussion. Also removed paragraph about historical analysis unless someone names the analysts.

Phrases like the following don't belong in a summary of terms. The represent discussion, not definition.

  • due to fears that such systems could counter the MAD scenario and, thereby, increase the likelihood that an ABM protected country would use their nuclear weapons aggressively.

It would be better to say name a critic of ABM in the article.

Also, I'm not sure whether Star Wars is really a more common name or primarily a disparaging term. Being pro-SDI, I'm going to leave that determination to others. --Ed poor

Why the strange formatting of the "1MT air burst" and subsequent sections? What's wrong with ordinary paragraphs? Also, what does "1MT" mean? (I know what it means, but you should tell me anyway. Pretend I'm 11 and I don't know.) --LMS