Miałbym wątpliwości co do tego , czy te małe państewko na garnuszku jankesów posiada broń atomową.

  Miałbym wątpliwości co do tego , czy te małe państewko na garnuszku jankesów posiada broń atomową.

Wg. mnie jedynie straszy.
**
Te małe państewko rządzi USA, które jest jego kolonią, jeżeli USA ma broń nuklearną, Izrael też by je miał, ale czy tak zwana broń nuklearna rzeczywiście istnieje? Mam co do tego poważne wątpliwości.

Everything in a 2 mile radius of the explosion’s epicenter was vaporized.
(‘The Manhattan Project: The Making of the Atomic Bomb’ Al Cimino)

There you have it. ‘Everything’ was ‘vaporized’. Including the people. But wait:

The [nuclear] scientist later became annoyed with me when I showed him a paper in which I had written that many people in Hiroshima were “vaporized” by the bomb. He pointed out that the correct term was “carbonized”. “That’s the problem with nonscientists: you are so sloppy with detail,” he added.
(‘People of the Bomb’ Hugh Gusterson)

Hmm… another multi-cultural moment. But I’m inclined to be more forgiving about that kind of sloppiness. Sometimes it’s hard to know, in Marvin Gaye’s immortal words, what’s going on. Even when bodies aren’t vaporized, merely carbonized, can we really be certain it was an effect of The Bomb? What would you say about the bodies in this photograph? Atomic carbonization? Or conventional napalm cooking?

(…)
What honest commander would turn his back on the AK, destroy all plans, and never look at it again? It smells more like concealing the evidence on a strictly Kabuki shell of an atomic ‘weapon’. Basically it was abandoned after Hiroshima.

After the war ended, it was not expected that the inefficient Little Boy design would ever again be required, and many plans and diagrams were destroyed.
(Wikipedia)

Excuse me? This thing that cost umpteen billions in today’s money, that functioned perfectly under combat conditions without integration testing, the very model of AK-style weapons design philosophy – and they destroyed plans and diagrams? They dumped it? No, wait. The “inefficient Little Boy” design, or that design family, was in fact manufactured for deployment, and the same basic type was (supposedly) fired off exactly 3 more times:

(1) A test firing of the W9 11-inch nuclear artillery shell in test shot Upshot-Knothole Grable on May 25, 1953 (Wikipedia)

(2) The W33 was an American nuclear artillery shell, fired from an eight-inch (203 mm) M110 howitzer and M115 howitzer. A total of 2,000 W33 projectiles were produced, the first of which was manufactured in 1957. The W33 remained in service until 1992.The W33 is the third known model of gun-type fission weapons to have been detonated as a test. The W33 was tested twice, first in Operation Plumbbob Laplace, on September 8, 1957 (yield of 1 kt), and the TX-33Y2 in Operation Nougat Aardvark on May 12, 1962, with a yield of 40 kilotons.
(Wikipedia)

So despite the fact that the tech specs and diagrams were destroyed, it was reinvented from scratch, was manufactured, and “remained in service” until 1992. This again shows how simple and perfect a design it was, that it was cobbled together again after being decommissioned and having its tech specs destroyed. The whole story of the ‘gun’ design bombs reminds me of Wile E..Coyote setting up for a shot at Roadrunner.

I’m sure there were good secret reasons for all these illogical actions and conflicting claims. So let’s confine ourselves to the deeper question: was there no integration testing… because they were so sure it would work? Or because they’d become so sure it wouldn’t work that they’d made other plans for staging a fake Japan atomic operation, and could relax about Little Boy’s performance (assuming there even was any sincere attempt at a functional Little Boy in the first place)? There are two situations where no test is run: when you know it works, and when you know it doesn’t.

Firestorm!

A firestorm is a conflagration which attains such intensity that it creates and sustains its own wind system. It is most commonly a natural phenomenon, created during some of the largest bushfires and wildfires. Although the word has been used to describe certain large fires, the phenomenon’s determining characteristic is a fire with its own storm-force winds from every point of the compass. The Black Saturday bushfires and the Great Peshtigo Fire are examples of forest fires with some portion of combustion due to a firestorm.

Firestorms can also occur in cities, usually as a deliberate effect of targeted explosives such as occurred as a result of the aerial firebombings of Hamburg, Dresden, and the atomic bombing of Hiroshima.
(Wikipedia)

The Hiroshima firestorm probably caused more damage than the blast itself. The general effect of a firestorm (for example, in Dresden) has been explained as follows:

Consider the use of precision saturation (incendiary) bombing in Dresden. At 10:09 AM, the first bombs were dropped unleashing a massive firestorm. Gigantic masses of air were then sucked in by the expanding inferno creating something similar to a tornado. People caught in this wind were mercilessly tossed into the flame, while those seeking protection underground suffocated as the fire gasped for more oxygen. The least fortunate were those who died from a blast of white heat which has temperatures so high it literally melts human skin.
(Eric Roberts)

Novelist Kurt Vonnegut Jr., who was present in Dresden at the time, commented:

You guys burnt the place down, turned it into a single column of flame. More people died there in the firestorm, in that one big flame, than died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined.

Another analyst comments:

How and why, for more than half a century, did the U.S. government fail to predict nuclear fire damage as it drew up plans to fight strategic nuclear war? U.S. bombing in World War II caused massive fire damage to Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but later war plans took account only of damage from blast; they completely ignored damage from atomic firestorms. Recently a small group of researchers has shown that for modern nuclear weapons the destructiveness and lethality of nuclear mass fire often–and predictably–greatly exceeds that of nuclear blast.
(Whole World on Fire: Organizations, Knowledge, and Nuclear Weapons Devastation (Cornell Studies in Security Affairs))

They ask a good question. Why minimize nuclear-ignited firestorms? The problem is that firestorms can arise from causes other than nuclear, and have effects that are all too similar to supposed nuclear outcomes. It seems the brass at the time were anxious that nobody start to line up and too closely compare the ‘atomic’ outcomes against those of conventional firebombing raids.

Beginning with an incendiary raid on Tokyo on 9 March 1945 which Japanese records showed killed 83,793 and burned out 267,000 buildings (25% of Tokyo’s buildings), sixty-four Japanese cities were destroyed by non-nuclear air raids.

https://varapanno.blogspot.com/2024/02/death-object-exploding-nuclear-weapons.html?m=1