From the Telegraph:
US 'planned to blow up a nuclear bomb on the Moon'
The US planned to explode a nuclear bomb on the Moon during the Cold War as a show of strength, according to reports.Frank J. from IMAO must have had an inside line, in his legendary post on IMAO.
American military chiefs allegedly devised the secret project, named 'A Study of Lunar Research Flights' – or 'Project A119' – in the hope that the Soviet Union would be intimidated by viewing the nuclear flash from Earth.
It would give the US a much needed morale boost after the Russians successfully launched Sputnik in 1957, according to physicist Leonard Reiffel, who was involved in the project.
According to the report in The Sun, the US would have used an atom bomb, because a hydrogen bomb would have been too heavy. The planning reportedly included calculations by astronomer Carl Sagan, who was then a young graduate.
Military officials however reportedly abandoned the idea, which would have taken place in 1959, because of fears that it would have an adverse effect on Earth should the explosion fail.
The project documents were kept secret for nearly 45 years, and the US government has never formally confirmed its involvement in the study.
The “legendary post on IMAO” turns out to be a juvenile fantasy about America getting its way by “eradicating” those that don’t fall line “in the most painful way possible” such that those we don’t kill will “say the name of America with hushed whispers and always praise us in public for fear of reprisal”. Kind of like Sadam ruled Iraq, or Stalin Russia, but on a global scale.ReplyDelete
I guess for some Christians just waiting for their God to torture their enemies isn’t enough. They need to spice it up with fantasies of mass murder and genocide. Onward Christian soldiers!
Christian conservatives always argue that they are the good-guys, but often, when they think they’re talking amongst themselves and nobody is listening, they reveal their true nature.
Frank J.'s "Nuke the Moon" post was a satire on American jingoism.
You don't really get satire, do you KW?
You don't really get satire, do you KW?Delete
I guess not.
My main problem seems to be distinguishing satire from mainstream conservative thought.
Indeed that is your problem. A little bit of insight would help you a lot.Delete
There is no problem with KW's sense of humor. This is Poe's law in action.Delete
In fact, for a long time I suspected that this here site was a parody. I was only dissuaded when I saw a link from Discovery Institute.
I still have some nagging doubts. What if Discovery Institute, too, is a parody?
I'm betting they aren't if you're laughing at them. It's just the nature of the negative correlation. I'll have to check 'em out.Delete
By the way, I visited Townhall.com, and who did I find there? Thomas Sowell, economist and author of a couple dozen books, some of which are groundbreaking.
Perfect record, so far. Keep up the good work.
Is that the Thomas Sowell who thinks that Obama is the second coming of Hitler?Delete
I'm afraid to say. Haven't you heard about the drone strikes on US soil? Besides, we're in the midst of a national economic catastrophe caused by a 2.4% budget cut. Children are dying of starvation and disease, teachers are being laid off, bridges are collapsing, the nation's air traffic is paralyzed, and vaccines are being withheld, all at this very moment.Delete
On the bright side, though... the plans for the Martha's Vineyard holiday are on schedule and the oceans are receding.
But that editorial wasn't about Obama... it was about you, amigo. Read it again. For comprehension this time.
Thomas Sowell didn't say that Obama was the second coming of Hitler. I read the article you linked to and it said no such thing.Delete
That's why we can't trust you, Hoo.
Let's read Sowell''s piece together, slowly. Here are a couple of paragraphs, side by side:
When Adolf Hitler was building up the Nazi movement in the 1920s, leading up to his taking power in the 1930s, he deliberately sought to activate people who did not normally pay much attention to politics. Such people were a valuable addition to his political base, since they were particularly susceptible to Hitler's rhetoric and had far less basis for questioning his assumptions or his conclusions.
In our times, American democracy is being dismantled, piece by piece, before our very eyes by the current administration in Washington, and few people seem to be concerned about it.
You don't think Sowell is making a parallel between Germany in the 1930s and America today?
Oh, LJ, he just makes it up as he goes along. It's OK. If it weren't for hoo, kw, and backfield, this comment section would have all the charm of Whack-a-Mole without the moles.Delete
Oh, and I almost forgot troi boi, who keeps a sharp eye on the Pope's zapatos.
Hoo, you left a good bit of that editorial out.Delete
What it actually says is: "But the Constitution says that... the government... has not been confiscated by Barack Obama."
That's hilarious, admiral. You accuse me of omitting that quote, but then you yourself chop it up to completely change its meaning.Delete
Here is the quote, unabridged:
"Technically, it has not been confiscated by Barack Obama, but that is a distinction without a difference."
Sowell thus says that it was effectively confiscated. So Obama acts like Hitler. Maybe not quite on the technical level, but same for all practical purposes.
You are a liar, admiral. That's a shame.
Quick Quiz (TM):Delete
Who said: ""Our job is basically to keep the boot on the neck of British Petroleum..." (NYT, 5/3/2010)
(a) Glenn Beck
(b) Thomas Sowell
(c) Dick Cheney
(d) the Secretary of the Interior
[fade in "Ride of the Valkyries"]
That was a quick flip-flop, admiral! The flexibility of your opinions is truly astonishing for such an old man!Delete
You're a liar, hoo. I didn't accuse you of omitting "that quote".Delete
I said, and I quote: " you left a good bit of that editorial out..."
"Such people were a valuable addition to his political base, since they were particularly susceptible to Hitler's rhetoric and had far less basis for questioning his assumptions or his conclusions.
'Useful idiots' was the term supposedly coined by V.I. Lenin to describe similarly unthinking supporters of his dictatorship in the Soviet Union."
Those were the lines you left out, moron.
Can't you even manage to understand your own quotes?
As I said to begin with, the editorial is about you, amigo.
And the answer is....Delete
Ken Salazar, Obama appointee.
Quick Quiz(TM) 2:Delete
"I was in a meeting once and I gave an analogy to my staff about my philosophy of enforcement, and I think it was probably a little crude and maybe not appropriate for the meeting, but I’ll go ahead and tell you what I said:
It was kind of like how the Romans used to, you know, conquer villages in the Mediterranean. They’d go in to a little Turkish town somewhere, they’d find the first five guys they saw and they’d crucify them.
Then, you know, that town was really easy to manage for the next few years..."
(a) George Bush
(b) Ronald Reagan
(c) Dr Strangelove
(d) EPA Region VI Administrator
[fade in "Ride of the Valkyries"]
And the answer is:Delete
Al Armendariz, who resigned from the EPA.
EPA Administrator Jackson, mourning the resignation, said: "I respect the difficult decision he made and his wish to avoid distracting from the important work of the agency..."
And the crucifixions will continue until morale improves.
I am not sure what the point of your quizzes is. Do you agree with me that Sowell likened Obama to Hitler in that Townhall article?
“I'm afraid to say. Haven't you heard about the drone strikes on US soil?”Delete
Oh Admiral, I think you must be confusing reality with some TV show, “24” perhaps?
Dr. Strangelove, I presume?ReplyDelete