# Bush revoked nuke bomb development ban **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 26, 2004, 11:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-revoked-nuke-bomb-development-ban/271219 "2004-10-26T11:14:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Aldebaran](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Aldebaran](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aldebaran)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2004, 1:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-revoked-nuke-bomb-development-ban/271219/21 "2004-10-26T13:31:49Z")
> [@Airman Doors](#): > > Why should they? Do you worry about someone bombing your house every day? People in Iraq do. > [@](#): > > Why would you worry about a nuclear bomb, therefore? Seen the lunaticism and the inmeasurable arrogance and lunatical power hunger and bloodthirst of the current US administration: **I DO**. You also overlook -as is “normal” for peiple in the US - the typical US hypocrisy linked to this whole issue. Well, I was always against the weapon race but now I am complete in support of it. I hope by God that every nation on this globe gets its own nuclear weapon arsenal as soon as possible. That way every nation on this globe shall be at least a tiny little bit protected secured against power hungry bloodthirsty war mongering imperialist arrogant US idiots who receive the support of the voting US population. Salaam. A ---
**Author:** ![Metacom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecae2f/32.png) [@Metacom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Metacom)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2004, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-revoked-nuke-bomb-development-ban/271219/22 "2004-10-26T13:42:00Z")
> [@Aldebaran](#): > > Seen the lunaticism and the inmeasurable arrogance and lunatical power hunger and bloodthirst of the current US administration: **I DO** > … > That way every nation on this globe shall be at least a tiny little bit protected secured against power hungry bloodthirsty war mongering imperialist arrogant US idiots who receive the support of the voting US population. I find myself curiously swayed by your verbositical adjectivicality. ---
**Author:** ![World\_Eater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f04885/32.png) [@World\_Eater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/World_Eater)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2004, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-revoked-nuke-bomb-development-ban/271219/23 "2004-10-26T13:42:50Z")
> [@Airman Doors](#): > > Why should they? Do you worry about someone bombing your house every day? Of course not. Why? The likelihood that it will ever happen is absurdly low, so low that you’d have better odds on drowning in a slightly damp sponge. Why would you worry about a nuclear bomb, therefore? Only two have been used in 60 years for their intended purpose, out of how many? Nothing to worry about, I say. Did it ever occur to you that I might be worrying about more people then myself? The odds of it happening to _someone_ are a bit higher, wouldn’t you say? ---
**Author:** ![Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e36b37/32.png) [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airman_Doors_USAF)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2004, 1:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-revoked-nuke-bomb-development-ban/271219/24 "2004-10-26T13:43:11Z")
> [@Aldebaran](#): > > People in Iraq do. Fair enough. > [@](#): > > Seen the lunaticism and the inmeasurable arrogance and lunatical power hunber and bloodthirst of the current US administration: **I DO**. > Salaam. A Again, fair enough. Although, I do have to ask: if the US were going to use a nuke, why wouldn’t they have done so by now? They’ve had ample opportunity. ---
**Author:** ![Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e36b37/32.png) [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airman_Doors_USAF)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2004, 1:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-revoked-nuke-bomb-development-ban/271219/25 "2004-10-26T13:46:37Z")
> [@World Eater](#): > > Did it ever occur to you that I might be worrying about more people then myself? The odds of it happening to _someone_ are a bit higher, wouldn’t you say? Nope. I would not agree that the odds of nukes being used on someone else are appreciably higher. Nuclear weapons are not tactical, or even strategic, anymore. They fall into a totally different category: deterrence. I believe that they will never be used by the US again unless they are shot at by someone else, and even then I don’t think it’ll happen. Nobody wants to end the world. ---
**Author:** ![Desmostylus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c57346/32.png) [@Desmostylus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Desmostylus)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2004, 1:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-revoked-nuke-bomb-development-ban/271219/26 "2004-10-26T13:53:34Z")
> [@Airman Doors](#): > > Nope. I would not agree that the odds of nukes being used on someone else are appreciably higher. Nuclear weapons are not tactical, or even strategic, anymore. They fall into a totally different category: deterrence. I believe that they will never be used by the US again unless they are shot at by someone else, and even then I don’t think it’ll happen. Nobody wants to end the world. This sort of response is ridiculous. It’s like saying “the US wouldn’t invade Iraq with a force of only 130,000, because that obviously wouldn’t work, and the US isn’t that stupid”. Rumsfeld is the one in charge, and Rumsfeld _is_ that stupid. ---
**Author:** ![World\_Eater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f04885/32.png) [@World\_Eater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/World_Eater)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2004, 2:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-revoked-nuke-bomb-development-ban/271219/27 "2004-10-26T14:03:00Z")
> [@Airman Doors](#): > > Nope. I would not agree that the odds of nukes being used on someone else are appreciably higher. Nuclear weapons are not tactical, or even strategic, anymore. They fall into a totally different category: deterrence. I believe that they will never be used by the US again unless they are shot at by someone else, and even then I don’t think it’ll happen. Who’s saying the US? Let’s take a step back. You said that it’s silly to worry about nuclear weapons. Now I’m more concerned about finding quarters for laundry, but I’d be lying if I said I didn’t have a vague concern about some nut blasting something off, somewhere. I, like many, have relatives and friends all over the globe, so if something happens there’s a good chance I’ll know someone affected. To be honest, I feel it’s only a matter of time until someone sets one of these things off. It’s inevitable really. > [@](#): > > Nobody wants to end the world. Are you kidding me? We have no shortage of psychos out there. ---
**Author:** ![Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e36b37/32.png) [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airman_Doors_USAF)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2004, 2:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-revoked-nuke-bomb-development-ban/271219/28 "2004-10-26T14:03:49Z")
> [@Desmostylus](#): > > This sort of response is ridiculous. It’s like saying “the US wouldn’t invade Iraq with a force of only 130,000, because that obviously wouldn’t work, and the US isn’t that stupid”. Rumsfeld is the one in charge, and Rumsfeld _is_ that stupid. How is it stupid? There is more to the use of nuclear weapons than mere ego. If you pop one off you have to be willing to end the world. They are not useful weapons for war anymore, only for massive retaliation. Your argument is actually far more ridiculous than mine. You think that because Rumsfeld is a lousy SecDef that it naturally follows that he would wish to end the world, that he’s crazy enough to talk Bush into using them and that they’re both crazy enough to give the order and confirm it, thus ending civilization as we know it? Please. You’re letting your opinions about them cloud your judgment. ---
**Author:** ![Metacom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecae2f/32.png) [@Metacom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Metacom)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2004, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-revoked-nuke-bomb-development-ban/271219/29 "2004-10-26T14:15:40Z")
> [@Airman Doors](#): > > How is it stupid? There is more to the use of nuclear weapons than mere ego. If you pop one off you have to be willing to end the world. They are not useful weapons for war anymore, only for massive retaliation. Right, but the weapons that are being developed arguably _would_ be useful for war: I don’t think anyone is going to hit us with strategic nukes if we use tactical nukes against a country (like Iraq, Afganistan, Iran, and North Korea) that doesn’t have strategic nukes to retaliate with. ---
**Author:** ![Metacom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecae2f/32.png) [@Metacom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Metacom)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2004, 2:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-revoked-nuke-bomb-development-ban/271219/30 "2004-10-26T14:17:29Z")
> [@Metacom](#): > > Right, but the weapons that are being developed arguably _would_ be useful for war: I don’t think anyone is going to hit us with strategic nukes if we use tactical nukes against a country (like Iraq, Afganistan, Iran, and North Korea) that doesn’t have strategic nukes to retaliate with. I should have said “that doesn’t have strategic nukes _and a useable delivery system_”. North Korea may have nukes, but they don’t yet have a tested means of delivering them to US population centers (that I know of). ---
**Author:** ![Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bosda_di_chi_of_tricor/32/16845_2.png) [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosda_Di_Chi_of_Tricor)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2004, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-revoked-nuke-bomb-development-ban/271219/31 "2004-10-26T14:20:43Z")
> [@Metacom](#): > > I should have said “that doesn’t have strategic nukes _and a useable delivery system_”. North Korea may have nukes, but they don’t yet have a tested means of delivering them to US population centers (that I know of). Sure it does. In the back of a pickup truck, across the Mexican Border. ---
**Author:** ![flapcats](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/7993a0/32.png) [@flapcats](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flapcats)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2004, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-revoked-nuke-bomb-development-ban/271219/32 "2004-10-26T14:23:46Z")
> [@legion](#): > > [Senate OK’s ending ban on nuclear research.](http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-05-20-nuclear-usat_x.htm) That’s the one - my cite is from August’s Scientific American. ---
**Author:** ![Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e36b37/32.png) [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airman_Doors_USAF)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2004, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-revoked-nuke-bomb-development-ban/271219/33 "2004-10-26T14:28:00Z")
> [@World Eater](#): > > Who’s saying the US? Let’s take a step back. You said that it’s silly to worry about nuclear weapons. Now I’m more concerned about finding quarters for laundry, but I’d be lying if I said I didn’t have a vague concern about some nut blasting something off, somewhere. I, like many, have relatives and friends all over the globe, so if something happens there’s a good chance I’ll know someone affected. To be honest, I feel it’s only a matter of time until someone sets one of these things off. It’s inevitable really. I missed something else with this. I would suggest that this is prcisely the origin of the US “hypocrisy” on nuclear weapons. the reason for our large arsenal was the same as that of the (former) Soviet Union: deterrence. Now that that threat is mitigated (though I dare say not gone), the reason why the US is against proliferation is because while one cannot hide the physics of how to make a bomb, one can deny the materials to people, thus keeping the stuff out of the hands of psychos. > [@](#): > > Are you kidding me? We have no shortage of psychos out there. Maybe not, but due to the US and other countries they don’t have the means to pop of a nuke. ---
**Author:** ![Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e36b37/32.png) [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airman_Doors_USAF)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2004, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-revoked-nuke-bomb-development-ban/271219/34 "2004-10-26T14:30:45Z")
If you read that cite, you’ll note that the House’s bill will keep the ban in place. Good on them. ---
**Author:** ![World\_Eater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f04885/32.png) [@World\_Eater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/World_Eater)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2004, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-revoked-nuke-bomb-development-ban/271219/35 "2004-10-26T14:58:38Z")
> [@Airman Doors](#): > > I missed something else with this. I would suggest that this is prcisely the origin of the US “hypocrisy” on nuclear weapons. the reason for our large arsenal was the same as that of the (former) Soviet Union: deterrence. Now that that threat is mitigated (though I dare say not gone), the reason why the US is against proliferation is because while one cannot hide the physics of how to make a bomb, one can deny the materials to people, thus keeping the stuff out of the hands of psychos. I would prefer to find a way to correct _why_ people would want to nuke us. Like I said before it’s only a matter of time until they get the parts. The technology and knowledge is becoming easier to acquire, and sooner or later they’ll sneak in the material needed. Like the old saying goes, building a better mousetrap only results in smarter mice. ---
**Author:** ![Aldebaran](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Aldebaran](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aldebaran)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2004, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-revoked-nuke-bomb-development-ban/271219/36 "2004-10-26T14:58:39Z")
> [@Airman Doors](#): > > Although, I do have to ask: if the US were going to use a nuke, why wouldn’t they have done so by now? They’ve had ample opportunity. Why wanting to develop something called “mini” nukes if not for being able to use them with “mini” effort and “mini” visibility on “mini” targets ? And by the way: I find the use of DU enough example of US lunaticism already. Do you volunteer to go clean that mess up? Salaam. A ---
**Author:** ![Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e36b37/32.png) [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airman_Doors_USAF)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2004, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-revoked-nuke-bomb-development-ban/271219/37 "2004-10-26T15:02:23Z")
> [@World Eater](#): > > I would prefer to find a way to correct _why_ people would want to nuke us. Like I said before it’s only a matter of time until they get the parts. The technology and knowledge is becoming easier to acquire, and sooner or later they’ll sneak in the material needed. Like the old saying goes, building a better mousetrap only results in smarter mice. And I’m in total agreement with you on that, as well, although we’re not the only targeted country in the world. ---
**Author:** ![Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e36b37/32.png) [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airman_Doors_USAF)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2004, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-revoked-nuke-bomb-development-ban/271219/38 "2004-10-26T15:03:45Z")
DU??? What is that? ---
**Author:** ![Metacom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecae2f/32.png) [@Metacom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Metacom)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2004, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-revoked-nuke-bomb-development-ban/271219/39 "2004-10-26T15:05:47Z")
> [@Aldebaran](#): > > And by the way: I find the use of DU enough example of US lunaticism already. Do you volunteer to go clean that mess up? Lunacy. “Lunaticism” isn’t a word. Also, neither is “Lunatical.” Try “insane” if you need an adjective denoting mental unsoundness. ---
**Author:** ![Metacom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecae2f/32.png) [@Metacom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Metacom)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2004, 3:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-revoked-nuke-bomb-development-ban/271219/40 "2004-10-26T15:07:12Z")
> [@Airman Doors](#): > > DU??? > > What is that? Depleted Uranium. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-revoked-nuke-bomb-development-ban/271219.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-revoked-nuke-bomb-development-ban/271219.md?page=3)