Davy Crockett: King of the Atomic Frontier (2024)

Nice, they should use it next season’s 24.

Can’t imagine how amped up you’d be firing this thing, nuclear is just so unpredictable seeming, Id’ definitely wet myself.

I bet the soldiers did not have many children.

I wonder what has happened to all of them? I never seem to hear what happens to all our nukes.
DO we dismantle them? How many could we fire right now? How many nuclear weapons do we possess?

And finally, just how much would one of those cost at wal-mart?

If only all atomic weapons could be this cute…

DI

thank god these were never actually used as a battlefield tactical deployment could, i would imagine, have so easily escalated to the ICBMs being launched – in a nuclear war we all lose (he says, stating the obvious)

great article and love this site :-))

I think you have your figures off a little here. An example is the 20 ton yield. If you are getting this figure from the global security site it says .18 kiloton which turns out to be 180 ton yield not 18 which would be .018 kiloton. It is very difficult to design a device with a yield smaller than .1 kiloton, and really why would you want to?

Also prompt critical refers to the prompt vice delayed neutrons maintaining the reaction. Reactors are stable and easily controlled because they rely upon the delayed neatrons for criticality (critical means that one fission will produce enough neutrons to cause one more fission. most neutrons are absorbed and do not go on to cause another fission). A nuclear device is really blowing up because it has gone super critical.

Radioactive elements (isotopes) tend to eject all sorts of stuff…gamma’s, beta’s, alpha’s (a helium nucleus) not just neutrons (slow and fast). Only specific isotopes will eject neutrons.

justapeon said: “I think you have your figures off a little here. An example is the 20 ton yield. If you are getting this figure from the global security site it says .18 kiloton which turns out to be 180 ton yield not 18 which would be .018 kiloton. It is very difficult to design a device with a yield smaller than .1 kiloton, and really why would you want to?

Actually, the error appears to be in the Global security article, which disagrees with itself when it says “It’s 51-pound nuclear warhead had an explosive yield of 0.18 kilotons (equivalent to 18 tons of TNT, with an added radiation effect).” Other sources confirm the 18 ton yield, though most round it up to 20 since there was a lot of variation.

Also prompt critical refers to the prompt vice delayed neutrons maintaining the reaction. Reactors are stable and easily controlled because they rely upon the delayed neatrons for criticality (critical means that one fission will produce enough neutrons to cause one more fission. most neutrons are absorbed and do not go on to cause another fission). A nuclear device is really blowing up because it has gone super critical.

“Prompt critical” is a special case of supercriticality where each fission triggers more than one additional fission, an exponential increase which can lead to an explosion. More info here.

Radioactive elements (isotopes) tend to eject all sorts of stuff…gamma’s, beta’s, alpha’s (a helium nucleus) not just neutrons (slow and fast). Only specific isotopes will eject neutrons.”

Yes, though in the case of our plutonium bomb, neutrons are in play.

Kiwi said: “yeah well let’s hope new zealand won’t get effected too bad if a nuclear war does happen…”

If one nuke gets launched, they’re all gettin launched. You’ll most likely be dead before you hear about it on TV.

Barring, of course, a terrorist organization getting their hands on a bomb… Then there’s a chance the world won’t end. Still a possibility if their home nation (Iran/North Korea) has bombs… Eh, too many scenarios… most of which end in a white hot flash of light.

https://www.damninteresting.com/?p=213

This one, hmm, guess annie was a bit bigger than david/davey

It always amazes me how much capacity and ingenuity we put into killing ourselves.

It just wasnt enough to create nuclear ICBMs we needed a nifty hand held version as well?

blenderhead said: I wonder what has happened to all of them? I never seem to hear what happens to all our nukes. DO we dismantle them? How many could we fire right now? How many nuclear weapons do we possess?”

Would be Damn Interesting to know, but I dont think I would be able to sleep at night again afterwards knowing the primate president is in charge of that lot!!!

PresMatt said: “

Barring, of course, a terrorist organization getting their hands on a bomb… Then there’s a chance the world won’t end. Still a possibility if their home nation (Iran/North Korea) has bombs… Eh, too many scenarios… most of which end in a white hot flash of light.”

I worry about North Korea and Iran having the bomb, but then again, America is the only country to actually drop a bomb on a population (twice) and furthermore is the only western nation that has initiated unilateral wars in the last decade, and no one seems to raise issue with their nuclear arsenal. And before you start talking about radical fundamentalist leaders in NK and Iran, didn’t God tell George Bush to invade Iraq? sounds pretty fanatical to me.

I also recall reading about a company called ABB which supplied North Korea with the machinery to build the bomb, and if I remember correctly, Donald Rumsfeld was a CEO of the company at the time. You will have to excuse me if I’m incorrect, as I can’t recall where I read this.

Back on topic, very interesting article and amusing that the device itself looks almost like a charicature of what you would imagine it’s appearance to be. Would take nerves of steel to man the weapon that fired this. Not just because of self preservation, but also because ot the resulting carnage and loss of life.

Re: comment #5 by blenderhead

There is a “MEGATONS TO MEGAWATTS” program for using up weapons grade material in power reactors.
It’s easy to down blend weapons grade uranium to low enrichment suitable for light water reactors. My understanding is that it’s hard to use plutonium in light water reactors, but there is work being done on using up weapons grade plutonium in CANDU reactors.

Well, the only “comment” I can come up with is from a favorite artist:

http://music.yahoo.com/track/894580

Of course another Disney movie was based on this war stuff, I think it was called “sh*tty,sh*tty,Bang,Bang” Lol JK

blenderhead said: “The nuclear bombs we dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima saved -millions- of lives. The only use of these hellish weapons in history was a responsible use, oddly enough. A miracle, huh?”

There is much evidence that points to the contrary but that issue has been more than dealt with in previous threads.

The most important thing that nuclear devices have ever achieved is the prevention of war between Superpowers. It’s sad that people are so desperate to fight each other that guaranteed anhialation is about all that eventually stopped them, and even then, only just.

Kiwi said: “Nuclear weapons are going to destroy the earth one day *sigh*”

Actually, we could simultaniously detonate every nuke we have and the earth would be fine. Life as we know it would end, but the earth itself would just need a few thousand years to recover. Now if we use them to knock the moon out of orbit…

Blenderhead, I agree. The casualties on both sides would have been huge. Japan had also been extensively warned:

https://www.damninteresting.com/?p=30

Anyway, just imagine how fast one of those bombs could bake a pie! It would happen in a flash!
(how do you make links on comments?)

It used to really bother me when I realised that Nuclear stuff kind of fizzed and reproduced – I’m not good with the whole nucleus things and protons and electrons make my head spin, but I’m pretty sure I get the point and the incredible benefits of Nuclear energy.

It still bothers me, but I’ve given up on worrying whether it’ll end our lives, because there’s not much anyone can do about it. The technology is out there, it’s just a matter of time before somebody tosses a co*ke can out of a plane and puts a crater in the world.

I especially hate how it’s really convenient to kill everything in a so-and-so mile radius.

Imagine. You’re living in WWII Poland and you’ve heard news that the Americans are coming to liberate your beloved country – by wiping out life, 1000 square feet at a time.

Since apparently they needed these little fellers in case the Axis got even more co*cky, it doesn’t sound much like they were going to be using them as offense. So what’s the freaking idea here? Wipe out your own terrain to get the enemies off?

the US have been buying old soviet warheads and converting them into reactor fuel

also we do the same with ours

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/summary.htm

materials would be reprocessed to make them usable in newer weapons.

remember the materials are decaying
so any left over small bombs like these would need to have any fuel reprocessed to make a usable nuke
they do have a shelf-life. all of them do.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki

It was not neccesarry, and most generals agree Japan was ready to surrender.

Hmmm…

No abort feature, a range only four times that of the “radius of certain death”, and the spark of a full-blown nuclear exchange in the hands of trigger-happy infantrymen. Sounds like the dumbest weapon ever developed. What was the next step, nuclear hand grenades? Uranium-tipped bayonets?

Plus, what if this happens: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPRmFaXSkjc

senorstu said: “Hmmm…
What was the next step, nuclear hand grenades? Uranium-tipped bayonets?

*stab *
Look! You’re eroding!

Maybe I am being incredibly nieve, but isn’t the thought of nuclear bombs “wiping out all life on the planet” a bit overstated? I mean, bombs have a limited (but still large) blast and fallout radius. Wouldn’t it take a hell of a lot of bombs to take out all life on the planet? It should take multiple large warheads just to take out one major city.

And who the hell is going to bomb Coffeyville, Kansas? Seems like we are dispersed enough to survive?

Am I wrong?

superJoy: amen!

CoryP: no offense, but you are seriously mistaken. I suggest you pick-up some books to broaden your knowledge. For instance, radioactive fall-out spreads much further than the immediate area of the blast. Time and time again even well-respected scientists have underestimated the devastating effects of radioactivity (just look at any documentary about Chernobyl and you’ll see what I mean).

So, because you are a living being, you’re going to have to eat and drink somehow, but if those resources are contaminated, you’re as good as dead anyway. Radioactivity is something to be taken VERY SERIOUSLY by anyone with half a brain. That’s why nations trying to develop nuclear weapons of any kind must be discouraged to do so, for everyone’s sake.

rev.felix said: “Actually, we could simultaniously detonate every nuke we have and the earth would be fine. Life as we know it would end, but the earth itself would just need a few thousand years to recover. …”

But wouldn’t that lead to global warming?

The US has about 10,000 nuclear warheads, down from a peak of 30,000 in the 1960’s. The plan is to further reduce this to 2,220 by 2012. Life on earth is getting safer all the time!

On the subject of terrorists making a small bomb – It is not easy to miniaturize a nuclear bomb. There is at least one part which is simply not made anymore. Replacing it with off-the-shelf parts would require thousands of parts – which would blow up the size.

CoryP said: “Seems like we are dispersed enough to survive?Am I wrong?”

We are. It could be devastating, but would not be extinction. Not anywhere close in my opinion, but I’d truly love to see if we took the peak counts of all nukes, and fired them optimally all over the globe, how much actual livable space could be destroyed. I think it would be far far less than we fear.

vonmeth said: “It was not neccesarry, and most generals agree Japan was ready to surrender.”

Which they did not do after the first bomb. They can say what they want, and people believed whatever they believed. They simply did not surrender after Hiroshima. And if they surrendered eventually due to Russia in Manchuria, were we supposed to be precognizant that that would happen?

If they were indeed ready to surrender, they needed to make it clear and wave the white flag openly and express their terms. It was not our duty to go look for the white flag in their pocket and then divine that they had intended to wave it.

On the immorality of it, I just don’t see it, Japan tried attacks on our civilian population first, bombing our forests here in Oregon, and yes I’m still upset about it :) They thought they could start fires large enough to spread along the coast and into our cities. Rangers put out the one fire they did get started, but I still look for those SOBs coming back everytime I go to Cape Perpetua.

Morgan said: “We are. It could be devastating, but would not be extinction. Not anywhere close in my opinion, but I’d truly love to see if we took the peak counts of all nukes, and fired them optimally all over the globe, how much actual livable space could be destroyed. I think it would be far far less than we fear.”

I think the reason people feel we would all die is because of Nuclear Winter™. I suppose it IS just a theory – let’s hope we never find out if it’s correct.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_winter

vonmeth said: “http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki

It was not neccesarry, and most generals agree Japan was ready to surrender.”

The peace party of Japan used the devastation of the bombings to convince the war supporting leaders of Japan to surrender. It may not have been the best way, but Japan is now peaceful. So yes, many Japanese leaders wanted to surrender. Unfortunately, there weren’t enough.

Here, this is from that article you posted: “We of the peace party were assisted by the atomic bomb in our endeavor to end the war.” under the debate section.

Perhaps a massive drop of pies would have resolved the war as well. The simple good tasting things in life are what really make a difference.

Techno-Kid said: “I think the reason people feel we would all die is because of Nuclear Winter™. I suppose it IS just a theory – let’s hope we never find out if it’s correct.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_winter

Nuclear Winter™ + Global Warming™ = 72º and sunny. Hooray!

Floj said:
Perhaps a massive drop of pies would have resolved the war as well. The simple good tasting things in life are what really make a difference.”

I agree. I propose a airdrop of cold iced tea in the middle east. Instead of killing one another, lets just drink iced tea and smoke weed.

Not to be pedantic, but the ancestors of David/Davy Crockett probably had nothing to say about what he is called, as they are (presumably) as dead as he is. His descendants, OTOH, might have something to say about it, but what power have they against mighty Disney? Surely less than a Soviet tank commander against a Davy Crockett.

You can drop a soda can out of a plane today and make a crater. A small one. It is called littering.

Nuclear winter was BS from the get-go. Nuclear autumn, maybe. A big maybe, at that.

Yes, look at Chornobyl. I wouldn’t want to live there, but it is not a desolate desert-wasteland. A major, old-skool nuclear war would have devastated the US and USSR, probably Europe, China and the Middle East (or wherever the “provocation”/reason was located) but the strategically unimportant parts of the world, like New Zealand (uh, except WOOL would be a strategic resource when nuclear winter happened) would probably never have seen a single mushroom cloud. Point is, as Morgan Freeman said in Deep Impact the world would have continued, life would have gone on. It would have sucked to be a survivor, à la The Day After, but humans would have survived.

I sure could use some sweet iced tea about now, myself.

The reason places like New Zealand would never see a single mushroom cloud is because the whole freakin’ Pacific is nuclear free.

And I agree, New Zealand is a strategic nonety, thats why it wasnt even included in the ANZUS treaty.

rev.felix said: “Now if we use [nukes] to knock the moon out of orbit…”

Not gonna happen, sir, not ever. The energy required to notably shift Luna’s orbit is way more than that of all our nukes put together. Planets (and large moons) are very big things indeed.

Silverhill said: “Not gonna happen, sir, not ever. The energy required to notably shift Luna’s orbit is way more than that of all our nukes put together. Planets (and large moons) are very big things indeed.”

But we can try. We can try. If we work together, we can overcome all obstacles!

Brrrr……. It’s bloody frightening to see the naivete of the early nuclear experimenters. It’s a wonder we’re still on this planet. All we need now is for one of these dandy little warheads to fall into the hands of the [insert name of freedom-fighters here].

Another 9.2 on the DI-o-meter, Alan. Thanks!

Floj, blenderhead, you’ve missed the point. “Give a man a pie and you’ll feed him for a day….” What we need is to teach ’em all basic culinary skills and convince ’em all to make their own pies.

fvngvs: Please finish that thing about the pie

“Give a man a pie and you’ll feed him for a day….”

…teach a man to make a pie, and what, he’ll know how to make a pie?

fvngvs said: “

Floj, blenderhead, you’ve missed the point. “Give a man a pie and you’ll feed him for a day….” What we need is to teach ’em all basic culinary skills and convince ’em all to make their own pies.”

Ah, but you never tell everyone the secrets of your home recipe! Just give’em the basics so they can create their own new masterpiece. mmmhmm

Well, personally, I can stand to wait a while before someone can toss a soda can out of a plane and make a NUCLEAR crater.

As for the moon-out-of-orbit thing – if you’ve read anything about the moon, you’ll know it’s sprinkled with craters, and if I remember correctly, meteors that have hit the moon have the force of a great many nukes.

https://www.damninteresting.com/?p=476

Y’all might find this article interesting too. It was like a tastey slice of pie.

God said: “The reason places like New Zealand would never see a single mushroom cloud is because the whole freakin’ Pacific is nuclear free.

And I agree, New Zealand is a strategic nonety, thats why it wasnt even included in the ANZUS treaty.”

If you had oil… you might be worthy of invasion. Or that’s what the world is currently thinking. :-(

rev.felix said: “Actually, we could simultaniously detonate every nuke we have and the earth would be fine. Life as we know it would end, but the earth itself would just need a few thousand years to recover. Now if we use them to knock the moon out of orbit…”

To my knowledge the moon is already moving away from earth at like a 1/4 inch a year or something, but its orbit will stabilize eventually.

The National Atomic Museum in Albuquerque NM has nearly every nuclear shape including most weapons. Most are on Kirtland AFB until the new NAM opens in fall 08. They have an Atomic Annie on display. Kirtland has the classified Atomic Weapons Display Area. Very interesting to see. But only those with a Secret Clearance and a need to know can see it. Sorry.

The main reason the Davy Crockett was demilled was because it could not be adequately secured against unauthorized use. Modern weapons have intricate mechanisms to ensure they can’t be detonated until properly authorized.

It was also a very “hot” weapon. Because if its size it did not have much shielding. The earth can survive a nuclear detonation. Look at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. People live there without problems. The main source of radiation is emitted within seconds of detonation in the form of heat, light and gamma radiation.

Most fallout is alpha contamination and unless you ingest it, it’s not harmful. When nuclear weapons were accidentally dropped on Palomares Spain there were several low order detonations (no nuclear yield but high explosives detonated). Most of the alpha contaminated soil was removed and put in barrels and shipped back to the US. The remainder was plowed under. Alpha radiation only travels about 3cm and even paper can block it. Just stay away from the blast zone and you’ll be fine.

First and Last.

(Just thought that I should irritate the children. What good is being an adult if you can’t make a kid’s life miserable?)

Giltfoulanchor, I’m not sure which article you read. As these devices were in service until the 70’s I find it hard to believe that JFK had anything to do with pulling this system out of the field.

You really have to admire our government’s desire to turn everything into a nuclear weapon. I’m surprised that nuke hand grenades were not developed. I figure size and weight were the real limiting factor for that.

PK said: Just stay away from the blast zone and you’ll be fine.”

Sage advice for anyone contemplating nearby explosions, I do believe.

oldmancoyote said: “I’m surprised that nuke hand grenades were not developed. I figure size and weight were the real limiting factor for that.”

I think maybe the fact that no one could throw a nuclear hand grenade far enough to not kill themselves too came into the equation…

God said: “… the whole freakin’ Pacific is nuclear free.”

Presumably there are nuclear armaments based out of Pearl Harbor?

Silverhill said: “Not gonna happen, sir, not ever. The energy required to notably shift Luna’s orbit is way more than that of all our nukes put together. Planets (and large moons) are very big things indeed.”

Which, on a totally unrelated topic, is what really pissed me off about the Time Machine movie remake. Not only was the “one nuke made the moon fall from the sky” a lousy plot device, but the Aesop it was supposed to teach, “We went too far”, was just chock full of fail. One lousy piece of space rock zigs instead of zags and as a result, the human race is nearly wiped out, and the lesson here is that we should have just sat on our laurels for all eternity? Maybe we should move back into caves to avoid having homes that get flattened by hurricanes and earthquakes, too?

noway said: “I think maybe the fact that no one could throw a nuclear hand grenade far enough to not kill themselves too came into the equation…”

interesting indeed…not to mention, i would be a little timid having nuclear stuff hanging around my waist…i would like to have children someday…

Morgan said: “Nice, they should use it next season’s 24.

Can’t imagine how amped up you’d be firing this thing, nuclear is just so unpredictable seeming, Id’ definitely wet myself.”

24 is a totally unrelated topic. if you have nothing useful to say, say nothing at all. thank you.

VykkDraygo said: “if you have nothing useful to say, say nothing at all. thank you.”

Take thine own advice, I say. The B-2 (not “B-22”—not yet, at least; the XB-22 is under development) costs up to $2.2 billion apiece, not $22 billion (according to the GAO).
And, whatever its cost, it seems irrelevant here.

“imagine a NUKE now! is this really where the rest of our tax dollars go?”

No, not really—especially since no new nukes are being built nowadays.

“now look, pluto is no longer considered a planet!”

This also is not relevant—that is, useful—here.

“so THAT must be what scientists are doing, looking at crap we already classified YEARS ago!”

You’re making less and less sense as you go along. There are many instances where things need to be re-examined, even if they were classified years ago.

“i mean…what the hell…”

Indeed! What the hell are you going on about?

In support of the above comment, I have done a rough assessment of the first forty comments on this nuclear essay.
Smart: 13, 14.
Reasonable: 21, 22, 24, 27, 34, 35, 39.
A smattering of reasonable: 6, 12, 25, 29.
Goofy: 7, 8, 9, 11, 26, 37, 38, 40.
Borderline goofy: 10.
Idiotic: 16, 28.
Super idiotic: 15.
Almost no content: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 36.
Almost complete bullsh*t: 23, 31, 32, 33.
Technically correct complete bullsh*t: 30.
Unclassifiable: Those not selected above.

13. An isotope need not be radioactive.
15. The U.S. was central to the folly.

xcretor said: “I think it is a bit unfair to judge the legitamacy of the Hiroshima / Nagasaki bombings from this vantage of history. If you can use your imagination to assume the responsibility, knowledge and experience of President Truman at that point in history…”

We really do have differing points of view as the years go by, but I think it is OK to judge the past eventhough the decisions at the time made sense.

Slavery probably seemed like a good idea, at the time. The Crusades – – Vietnam – – the Edsal.

Even God destroyed the entire human population, except for Noah’s family, and we were told that was a great idea. (Cue rainbow here.)

Ed Graham

Anthropositor said: “In support of the above comment, I have done a rough assessment of the first forty comments on this nuclear essay.

Smart: 13, 14.

Reasonable: 21, 22, 24, 27, 34, 35, 39.

A smattering of reasonable: 6, 12, 25, 29.

Goofy: 7, 8, 9, 11, 26, 37, 38, 40.

Borderline goofy: 10.

Idiotic: 16, 28.

Super idiotic: 15.

Almost no content: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 36.

Almost complete bullsh*t: 23, 31, 32, 33.

Technically correct complete bullsh*t: 30.

Unclassifiable: Those not selected above.

13. An isotope need not be radioactive.

15. The U.S. was central to the folly.”

Anthropositor you have way too much time on your hands. Do you work for the government???

Erasure

[spammy link removed]

vonmeth said: “http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki

It was not neccesarry, and most generals agree Japan was ready to surrender.”

too bad that all people cant be as all knowing as you seem to be.

“People at about 1,000 feet from the blast would experience temporary fatigue and nausea which would then pass, but this misleading “walking ghost” condition leads to a painful death after a few days of apparent well-being.”

This is called latent lethality. Ususally starts with a whole body dose of 200-350 cGy. But even then up 50% can survive with supportive care. 350-550 cGy you have maybe 10% chance of surviving. One of the best things you can do if you recieve above 550 cGy is dig your own grave as it will cut down on the resulting disease associated with rotting bodies.

blenderhead said: “The nuclear bombs we dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima saved -millions- of lives. The only use of these hellish weapons in history was a responsible use, oddly enough. A miracle, huh?”

No, not a miracle. Widely accepted propaganda. It is true that there may well have been a substantial saving in total lost lives. But it was an extreme propaganda excess to suggest that this number was in the millions. I was just a young lad at the time, but I was paying a lot of attention to what was happening, because I was having, like Diogenes, great difficulty finding an honest man.

I had already concluded that people don’t really even need a good reason to lie, especially to children. I was still chaffing over Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and the Tooth Fairy. I could not fathom why grown people would deliberately feed little children this sort of nonsense.

My father, a Presbyterian minister at the time, was a consummate liar with the children of his congregation, of every age.

The best of liars sow great confusion, expertly blending a lot of truth with strategic error and falsity. They capitalize on the deep wish to believe.

I do not believe my father ever prayed. He preyed. And when the Presbyterian Church tired of transferring him into new congregations, they cut him loose in a cosmetic way (simply retiring him, with the gift of a new car), leaving it for the rest of his immediate family to cope with carnage and criminality they should have and could have addressed more appropriately.

Not a second thought was given to his wife and children and what they had to deal with. How very Catholic of the Presbyterian Heirachy.

But I digress. Getting back to the bombings of the two pristine, non-strategic civilian target cities, it is not just a matter of should we have or shouldn’t we have. Could we have done it in such a way as to reduce casualties? Could we have accomplished the same purpose with only the immediate loss of fifty thousand souls, instead of almost triple that? Could the first bomb have been dropped a few miles off the coast of Japan? Then we would still have done significant damage, but at the same time have demonstrated a certain restraint to the rest of the watchful world. Such restraint might well have had a salutary effect on international politics.

I was once unable to avoid being face to face with General LeMay who was a central planner in these bombings, and who, seventeen years after Hiroshima, advocated much more aggressive actions than we ultimately employed during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Actions which could quite easily have ended all life as we know it on Earth (at almost the first moment in time in which that was really possible).

Anthropositor said: “No, not a miracle. Widely accepted propaganda. It is true that there may well have been a substantial saving in total lost lives. But it was an extreme propaganda excess to suggest that this number was in the millions…”

Nobody is ever going to be able to exactly calculate the number of lives saved by the bombs. Frankly I don’t care if it was millions or “only” hundreds of thousands. Any “substantial” number of lives saved should be something to be glad about.

Funny, I just heard of this Davy Crockett nuke only yesterday on a History Channel show.

Baader Meinhof Phenomenon at work once again! (it literally happens to me with alarming frequency that I’ve spoken to many friends and family about it, but it wasn’t until last night, reading the following DI article (link posted below) that I truly became aware that it was such a wide spread phenomenon… always glad to know I’m not just nuts! (although, on a daily basis? That’s a lotta Meinhof working for/against/unwittingly-uncaring-towards me (most likely the latter of the three possibilities).

https://www.damninteresting.com/the-baader-meinhof-phenomenon

Finally, in a closing thought: This was a Damned Interesting article for me to read, especially after seeing this same thing on “Modern Marvels: Failed Ideas and Inventions” episode that aired last night. DI indeed.

Bill Lake said: “I was assigned to guard the Davey Crockett in 1963, Germany. Those photographs are not even close to what I guarded. The Davey Crockett that I guarded was all stainless steel and resembled a morter type cannon, the size of a VW.”

never saw a stainless unit—I was assigned to wire up 18 of these working for comerical company in NY–still have some parts of one–would like to donate to some museum–any help on this?? email me–john c.

“…crossed the remote desert of southern Nevada to witness an historic event.”

No. They crossed the desert of southern Nevada to witness A historic event.

“An” house?
“An” horrible
“An” hostage”

GRrrrrrrrr…