posted on May, 24 2005 @ 10:19 AM
I might add that, back in the Cold War, the Arctic was an excellent place for a military base. Although the Arctic temperature is most beneficial to
a "Cold" war atmosphere (haha, sorry, had to do it), travelling through the Arctic circle is one of the shortest routes from Russia to North
America. We placed a handful of bases up there for early warning in case the USSR decided to launch a couple of nukes our way.
As one_small_step said, having a base in a remote area is prime for testing. You don't have a civilian population snooping around and getting in the
way. You also don't have to worry as much about your test going haywire and clearing a town off the map. If you think about it, Los Alamos and the
Trinity Site were excellent for the Manhattan Project for this reason alone. Imagine what would've happened if they would've tested the first nuke
somewhere with a large population, like Ft. Bliss in El Paso, TX? The secrecy would've been out the window, and one wrong calculation would've
wiped it off the face of the earth. Of course, there's those that will argue that El Paso wouldn't have been missed much...