anybody heard of a neutron bomb

Think befor you talk....
Why dont you use a neutron bomb in a terroist city? I think america killed enough innocent in fallujah.....
So why dont we just neutron bomb iran now? to kill their army off we will just kill every innocent person in the country.....
You sicken me.

You forget, to these people there are no innocent people in Fallujah. Only "Enemy combatants", and worst case some collateral damage...

Leaving enemy soldiers to die an extremely painful death over a week should be far below any civilised country to consider. If you do advocate this, you have nothing to complain about when your family starts dying off from Anthrax or some similarly abhorrent terrorist attack.

I am not religious, but "Do to others as you would have them do to you." is a pretty damn smart quote to me.

How does a question by a member, get turned to Anti-American hating?
I'm not even going to touch the Falluja topic its just silly.
Next time answer the question and don't try to spin it off into Anti-American BS.

Originally posted by WestPoint23
How does a question by a member, get turned to Anti-American hating?
I'm not even going to touch the Falluja topic its just silly.
Next time answer the question and don't try to spin it off into Anti-American BS.

You answered this guy with pretty much the same logic as me, only without the comments on Fallujah.

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Well there are a lot of weapons which we can use to end wars quickly, but they are deemed to be inhumane and just too deadly to use. I think using radiational sickens to kill the enemy will go down too well in the international community.

My comment wasn't meant as anti American. Please see it as "anti disgusting opinions" and anti all nuclear weapons, including Neutron ones.

People seem to think that Neutron weapons are "nicer" because they don't leave as much radiation behind as most other nuclear weapons. I believe we both see leaving someone to die a long gruesome death to be somewhat short of nice.

Peace.

Neutron weapons still pack a hefty blast, a 10kt Neutron weapon will produce the blast of a 1kt nuclear device.

Using Neutron weapons is even more sadistic than using gas. If you have ever seen pictures or read studies of people with massive radiation poisingin you wouldn't wish it on anyone. Your body literally falls apart as the radiation breaks apart your DNA molecules.

The simple fact is, a nuke is a nuke no matter how it's tuned.

It was these two comments below that stood out to me, the one about us regarding everyone as terrorists or enemy combatants, and the other one which tries to incorporate Falluja, Iran and incident people all into one. When all that was need to be said is that radiation poisoning is inhumane cruel and kills without discrimination, now why not just say that?

Originally posted by gekko
You forget, to these people there are no innocent people in Fallujah. Only "Enemy combatants", and worst case some collateral damage...

Originally posted by wang
Why dont you use a neutron bomb in a terroist city? I think america killed enough innocent in fallujah.....
So why dont we just neutron bomb iran now? to kill their army off we will just kill every innocent person in the country.....
You sicken me.

well to defend my questioning of why we weren't using them, it would be because i didn't know that it caused radiation poisoning, i figured it just up and killed people with a massive burst of something or other real fast. so my question was answered, we don't use them because they are quite inhumane, and i wouldn't advocate using them now. It is funny how quickly people will sick the attack dogs on someone they may disagree with though isn't it.

humans are for the most part inhumane without cause young kids pull the wings of butterflies or smash frogs with rocks in school we are prone to humiliating ugly kids we should not think we are above killing inhumanly I am all for using any means to control anyone that plans me harm 9/11 victims burned to death osama didn't care if nutron eradication of afganistan prevents a threat to me I say use it just one mans opinion

I'm not too sure, but wasn't it Jimmy Carter that vetoed the production of the Neutron Bomb???

It sounded like a good idea for a weapon, if "good" can be used to describe a weapon like that.

Some people claim that a neutron bomb WAS used in the battle for Bahgdad airport. It is said that the U.S. soldiers were getting their asses handed to them, when someone ordered a neutron bomb to be used. U.S. Forces pulled back, the nuke was used, and they strolled right in. They also say that the Jessica Lynch story was launched at about the same time to cover how bad we were losing that battle.

I do not know if it is true or not, I'm just repeating what some people have said.

reply to post by sir_chancealot


That's a negative. No neutron bomb was used there.

And how do I know? I was flying when the "thunder run" to the airport was going on. I think they would have let us know if something like that was happening.

A neutron bomb is an enhanced radiation nuclear weapon - with the warhead being neutron enchanced ; there are in fact several different enhanced radiation weapons , the one used on the spartan ABM (for example) is x-ray enhanced;

but its s still a nuke and it still goes BANG in a big and noticeable way.

www.opednews.com...

...

The weapons (plural) used at Baghdad airport sounds more like thermobaric than neutron bombs -
blog.wired.com...
- neutron bombs are kiloton-sized at least, there wouldn;t be any airport left. But thermobaric could kill the people without destroying the strutures.