Re: ELIEZER(thanks!) on the ethics of using weapons of mass destruction...

From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@aeiveos.com)
Date: Sat Nov 24 2001 - 23:32:21 MST

Next message: Max More: "Re: List Rules Part 1 (Was: Ad hominem? I think not.)"
Previous message: Robert J. Bradbury: "Re: WAR: appropriate first use (was: If we do get Afghanistan...)"
In reply to: John Clark: "Re: ELIEZER(thanks!) on the ethics of using weapons of mass destruction..."
Next in thread: Michael M. Butler: "Groveling over US nuke inventory, need life, was Re: ELIEZER(thanks!) on the ethics of using weapons of mass destruction..."
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

John wrote:

> Actually the gun design was never used again on any bomb,
> it's just too crude and inefficient and won't work at all with plutonium.

Interestingly enough, according to the article in Scientific American,
the Pakistani weapons appear to be made of primarily enriched uranium
(like thin man?) while the Indian weapons are made from Plutonium
(more like fat man).

Robert

Next message: Max More: "Re: List Rules Part 1 (Was: Ad hominem? I think not.)"
Previous message: Robert J. Bradbury: "Re: WAR: appropriate first use (was: If we do get Afghanistan...)"
In reply to: John Clark: "Re: ELIEZER(thanks!) on the ethics of using weapons of mass destruction..."
Next in thread: Michael M. Butler: "Groveling over US nuke inventory, need life, was Re: ELIEZER(thanks!) on the ethics of using weapons of mass destruction..."
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat May 11 2002 - 17:44:21 MDT