10 posts tagged with Nuclear and bombs.
Displaying 1 through 10 of 10. Subscribe:

"It's... dumb luck that we haven't had an accidental nuclear detonation"

Command and Control is a new book by Eric Schlosser about nuclear weapons mishaps, with a focus on the Damascus Accident. You can read an excerpt at Mother Jones, an op-ed adapted from the text at Politico, or a different op-ed at The Guardian. The book has been positively reviewed by The New York Times and Publishers Weekly. Schlosser has been interviewed by Steve Roberts on The Diane Rehm Show, Amy Goodman, Michael Mechanic at Mother Jones, and Ryan Devereaux at Rolling Stone.
posted by Going To Maine on Sep 19, 2013 - 66 comments

40,000,000 dead at home, but our boys won the war anyway!

The 36-Hour War. A look at the future of nuclear warfare, from a 1945 issue of Life Magazine
posted by empath on Apr 8, 2013 - 27 comments

Atomic Tests

Atomic Test Archive. Histories of atomic testing by country, with video and photographic archives. The Information Films page is interesting: One can envision 50's dad smugly admiring his tidy yard through freshly vapourised retinas. Also: the one-hour declassified Ivy Mike film at the internet archive.
posted by Wolfdog on Apr 19, 2010 - 8 comments

Amchitka Nuclear Test Videos

Back in the early 1960s, Amchitka, a volcanic, tectonically unstable island in the Rat Islands group of the Aleutian Islands in southwest Alaska was selected by the United States Atomic Energy Commission to be the site for underground detonations of nuclear weapons. Three such tests were carried out and, thanks to Youtube, you too can watch some declassified US Government Amchitka test films. The first, named Long Shot, was an 80-kiloton blast (video) and was followed by Milrow (1-megaton) (video) and Cannikin (said to be under 5-megaton) (video). There's also a declassified video that discusses the program at Amchitka in more detail.
posted by Effigy2000 on Sep 7, 2009 - 10 comments

Why He Went Nuclear.

Why He Went Nuclear. Before he was the infamous father of the "Islamic bomb," A.Q. Khan was just another midlevel scientist working at a research job in Amsterdam. Here, the story of how he betrayed his employer and set out to create a worldwide bazaar in lethal weapons.
posted by chunking express on Nov 20, 2007 - 19 comments

Six places to nuke when you're serious

Six places to nuke when you're serious
posted by lupus_yonderboy on Aug 9, 2006 - 75 comments

The day the sky exploded

The day the sky exploded. Ever wondered exactly what happened when the H-bomb hit Hiroshima? So did lots of scientists.. It's not pointless curiosity - these discoveries should help us all in the future. Of course, those in charge had other things in mind at the time. Hiroshima previously well examined here.
posted by ascullion on Jul 31, 2003 - 17 comments

You Call That Evidence?

You Call That Evidence? Op-Ed from the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists about the so-called evidence for the administration's claim that Iraq is "moving very near a nuclear weapon capability." Too bad something that at least seems to be approaching the truth will have nothing to do with whether we go to war or not.
posted by elgoose on Sep 11, 2002 - 51 comments

Nuking Lincoln

Nuking Lincoln (via www.dailygrail.com). Thaddeus McMullen, 1864. "I showed McMullen’s writings to physicists familiar with nuclear fission and they were stunned," Remarsh states. "His bomb was crude, with maybe a tenth of the destructive power of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima, but it would have worked. Maybe. I suspect this is a hoax, but it's interesting enough to post it anyway. Now whether the Confederates could have refined the uranium to make the bomb out of is another question. Any physicists care to express an opinion?
posted by aeschenkarnos on Jul 5, 2002 - 28 comments

Is Terrorists For Nukes the 2001 version of Arms For Hostages?

Is Terrorists For Nukes the 2001 version of Arms For Hostages? President Bush has lifted the sanctions on India and Pakistan imposed by the U.S. in 1998 to protest their "tit-for-tat" nuclear tests. In a memorandum just released by the White House, he states that keeping those sanctions in place "would not be in the national security interests of the United States". Is this an acceptable exchange? Just how far should the U.S. go in appeasing Pakistan, not to mention further fuelling its already explosive confrontation with India?
posted by MiguelCardoso on Sep 23, 2001 - 8 comments

Page: 1