|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Vlad Rostok
SAM-MIK General Tso's Alliance
101
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 03:45:00 -
[1] - Quote
Heimdallr69 wrote:bigolenuts wrote:SoTa PoP wrote:snipped - aint worth it. Snipped my ass. I just would like to know when we were going to nuke Russia during WW2. I am pretty sure that they were on the same side as 'Merica. I could be wrong though lol I don't remember correctly but I think Russia tried to ally with Germany which upset the allies, this was before ww2
Tried? Well, a non-aggression pact was signed. The two then proceeded to divide Poland between them.
|
Vlad Rostok
SAM-MIK General Tso's Alliance
103
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 23:16:00 -
[2] - Quote
Roman837 wrote:Dude....we went fighting Russia in ww2. Nukes were not invented then. ..Nor was rocketry. The atom bomb was dropped from a bomber. You are mistaking time eras
Uh, sorry Roman, but the Japanese would beg to differ with you on nukes in WWII. Cases in point being Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Also, the V2's raining down on London were rocket powered, courtesy of Werner von Braun (later a darling of the American space program). |
Vlad Rostok
SAM-MIK General Tso's Alliance
103
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 23:19:00 -
[3] - Quote
bigolenuts wrote:The war in Europe was over before the bombs were dropped on Japan.
Germany and Russia started out as homies until the entire Poland fiasco.
America provided support for Britian/France/Allies UNTIL "the day that will live in empathy", December 7, 1941.
Germany had been working on rocket systems, Werner Von Braun headed that department. I know this because everything around where I am from is named after him. Can't turn a corner without seeing Von Braun this, Von Braun that. He snuck out of Germany some how or another and helped the Americans on their rocketry.
The atomic bomb was so secret that the Vice President didn't even know about until he became President. In May of 1945 some scientists wanted Japan to see first hand what a detonation looked like but that was cancelled.
I will say this; there was a plan by the British to defend themselves against the Soviets with the help of the Americans but an attack never came after WW2.
But atomic bombs during WW2 on Russia, never. There was nothing to gain by it.
You had a good story Sota, sort of. Minus the parts that were unfucking true kind of killed it though.
Roman, I do know history and what I don't know I can find. I was just egging Sota on and watching him back peddle from the subject for a few days. How dare you say I didn't lol Him on the other hand, already proven.
Believe FDR said "infamy".
|
Vlad Rostok
SAM-MIK General Tso's Alliance
103
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 00:52:00 -
[4] - Quote
Roman837 wrote:Those were not nuclear dam weapons. Those were atomic bombs. And hydrogen bombs. Nuclear is much much worse.
Well, granted I'm not a nuclear engineer, just a chemical one, but I can read discernibly, and this seems legit to me (although Wikipedia may never be as trusted as the Encyclopaedia Brittannica):
Wikipedia wrote:A nuclear weapon is an explosive device that derives its destructive force from nuclear reactions, either fission or a combination of fission and fusion. Both reactions release vast quantities of energy from relatively small amounts of matter. The first fission ("atomic") bomb test released the same amount of energy as approximately 20,000 tons of TNT. The first thermonuclear ("hydrogen") bomb test released the same amount of energy as approximately 10,000,000 tons of TNT.
As of 2014, only two nuclear weapons have been used in the course of warfare, both times by the United States near the end of World War II. On 6 August 1945, a uranium gun-type fission bomb code-named "Little Boy" was detonated over the Japanese city of Hiroshima. Three days later, on 9 August, a plutonium implosion-type fission bomb code-named "Fat Man" was exploded over the Japanese city of Nagasaki. These two bombings resulted in the deaths of approximately 200,000 civilians and military personnel from acute injuries sustained from the explosions.- Wikipedia
It would seem that atomic or nuclear are both labels for a fission device, and so this argument would seem to be more semantics than anything else.
As to whether or not one is "much much worse", I would think that is more a function of yield. Then again, I'm just a chemical engineer, not a nuclear engineer.
Incidentally, if you haven't read "In Harm's Way", an account of the USS Indianapolis, which effectively delivered "Little Boy" to Tinian Island, I highly recommend it. |
|
|
|