WW2 atomic bombing of Hiroshima & Nagasaki

[Bwana]

<deleted>

[xchaotic]

While the details are top secret it is more or less know what yields the bombs owned by Russia and US have.
The truth is most of the warheads have similar or smaller power than the Nagasaki one, just because they're more useful tactically and strategically.
If you were to hit an area with a hydrogen bomb, there no life, no infrastructure left and you can't touch a huge area for years, even to march your troops through. Even if you win the war you have conquered wasteland, so the idea is develop smaller tactical warheads, that are either very precise or very heavy in radiation so that they kill and destroy electrical equipment, but keep the infrastructure in place and limit the radiation exposure to a few miles.
On the other hand a conventional bomb now offers similar yield, it's actually in the news - how US proposed to decrease the atomic arsenal, but would equip the submarine with equally powerful conventional warheads - that's why Russia says no...
You have better things to worry about mate or if you really want to not stop worrying about the bomb, just do some research...

[AtW]

Large yield hydrogen bombs are there to be as a deterrent.

Does not work if the other side wants to die though.

[DimPrawn]

Compared with the billions who will die due to catastropic climate change (man-made), a global nuclear war would be a walk in park. Ask pjclarke.

Hydrogen bombs? Pah, it's 4x4's that terrify me!

[EternalOptimist]

Human morbidity being what it is, makes it hard to shake these thoughts off sometimes

[Paddy]

While the details are top secret it is more or less know what yields the bombs owned by Russia and US have.
The truth is most of the warheads have similar or smaller power than the Nagasaki one, just because they're more useful tactically and strategically.
If you were to hit an area with a hydrogen bomb, there no life, no infrastructure left and you can't touch a huge area for years, even to march your troops through. Even if you win the war you have conquered wasteland, so the idea is develop smaller tactical warheads, that are either very precise or very heavy in radiation so that they kill and destroy electrical equipment, but keep the infrastructure in place and limit the radiation exposure to a few miles.
On the other hand a conventional bomb now offers similar yield, it's actually in the news - how US proposed to decrease the atomic arsenal, but would equip the submarine with equally powerful conventional warheads - that's why Russia says no...
You have better things to worry about mate or if you really want to not stop worrying about the bomb, just do some research...

Are you saying duck and cover won't work?

[norrahe]

Not very seasonal of me I know, but in the run-up to Christmas I found myself becoming fascinated by searching the web for information about the WW2 atomic bombing of Hiroshima & Nagazaki. God knows where this morbid fascination came from or what sparked off my interest. I remember the fear of a nuclear war being a underlying theme for a while during the 1980's (when I was a schoolboy), but it seems to have sunk very much into the background nowadays, perhaps as a result of the demise of the cold war.

Talking of being a schoolboy, I can remember seeing a picture on tv (probably late 1970's or early 1980's) of either Hiroshima or Nagazaki just after the bombing. The picture just looked like a field full of rubble. I remember at the time (I was probably 7 or 8 years old, maybe younger), my perception of it was that it was a huge mess, so huge that it could never be cleared up. I remembered thinking about how my mum might nag me if I left my room in a mess, and I'd feel guilty but could tidy it up if I made the effort. My feeling about the picture on tv was that it was a mess that even my parents couldn't clear up. At the time, I had no concept of the death and suffering of people. All I could see in the picture was the rubble of buildings that had been flattened by the blast wave.

The power of the internet, in terms of the volume and detail of information available and the ease with which it can be accessed, fueled my curiosity. I spent a good few hours reading accounts of Hiroshima, seeing pictures taken at the time, a (presumably CGI) video reconstruciton that showed
the blast wave flattening everything in it's path for probably at least a 1 mile radius. There was even a video clip of an interview with someone who was on the plane "Enola Gay" that dropped the bomb.

One thing that struck me as I trawled through the information was the sense of sadness that I felt for the people who were killed or badly injured by the bombs. I don't mean to cast any judgment whatsoever about the bombing. I can imagine that both sides had probably done some terrible things. War is war, and it's always bad news. However, it just occured to me that it was <not-sure-what-word-to-use-here> that I could feel such a strong feeling of sadness about something that happened 65 years ago, thousands of miles away. I suppose that empathy is what makes us human.

The effects of the bomb were incredible. Everything within about a 1 mile radius was destroyed, including people who were incinerated (turned to charcoal) or even vapourised, leaving just a shadow on the ground ("human shadow"). The people I felt saddest about were those who were severely burned (or otherwise injured) but who were not killed instantly. Their suffering over the minutes, hours, days, weeks must have been unimagineable. It made me wish that an all-powerful God does exist who would just end all suffering throughout all of time.

A scary thought was that if weapons had that much destructive capability in 1945, imagine what they have nowadays! I did some further research and found information about something called "Tsar Bomba" that was tested by the Russians in 1961, which was 50 megatons and the most powerful nuclear weapon ever tested. According to a wiki article about Tsar Bomba:

"The heat from the explosion could have caused third-degree burns 100 km (62 miles) away from ground zero. A shock wave was observed in the air at Dickson settlement 700 kilometres (430 mi) away; windowpanes were partially broken to distances of 900 kilometres (560 mi)."

... and that was almost 50 years ago!!

I got a feeling that I wasn't safe in my own home when I read about this. Just the idea that a nuclear bomb could explode miles and miles away and still probably flatten or incinerate the building. It suddenly made me realise how I'd taken my security for granted all these years.

Hope I haven't cast too much of a depressing vibe over CUK with this thread. I just was intrigued by this stuff and felt the urge to express it.

Peace,
Bwana
(in "being human" mode).
(or should that be "human being" mode?!)

If you ever get a chance to visit Japan, get to Hiroshima and go to the Peace Museum, just seeing the remnants of the bomb site and the artefacts in the museum is very moving.

The city itself has this eerie calm (similar to ground zero in New York, just after 9/11).

It was one of the most heart wrenching exhibits, I've seen and leaves you with an utter sense of your own mortality.

It brings up the horrors of war all too clearly.

[TimberWolf]

Large yield hydrogen bombs are there to be as a deterrent.

Does not work if the other side wants to die though.

How about threatening to bomb them with pictures of naked centrefolds rather than high explosives (if they are Muslims or whatnot)? Bombing them with money of any strong currency would probably be cheaper and more effective than TNT too, but a bit tulip if you want to invade.

As I passed some Japanese tourists in town the other day who were taking pictures, as they often are, I wondered to myself what do they find interesting in Britain and do they ever look at all those photos, as well as how polite and good natured they always seem to be.

[EternalOptimist]

How about threatening to bomb them with pictures of naked centrefolds rather than high explosives (if they are Muslims or whatnot)? Bombing them with money of any strong currency would probably be cheaper and more effective than TNT too, but a bit tulip if you want to invade.

As I passed some Japanese tourists in town the other day who were taking pictures, as they often are, I wondered to myself what do they find interesting in Britain and do they ever look at all those photos, as well as how polite and good natured they always seem to be.

to be fair, if someone dropped a nuke on me, then made me eat fish nest soup, and made my sister live on bukkake (whatever that is) I'd fckng smile and be good natured as well

[suityou01]

Bwana, are you ok? Seriously. Empathy is good, but reading between the lines is there any depression?