Dirty little secrets, dirty little lies--we always have our fingers in everbodies pie ! We the People have always considered ourselves "The World Police" ever since we created that end of time weapon. Now some person or persons have lifted that role from our shoulders, Thank God ! Maybe now we can finally degrade ourselves from our self appointed role as masters of the universe and get in line with the rest of the citizens of planet earth. Einstein screwed up by ever putting his private genious on paper. The scientists that evolved it ask Truman to destroy it. Truman took it away from the military but they took it back. IMHO, no good has ever come from nucluer energy our nucluer power ! I know some will say it has medical uses but I disagree. I think that it would be better if 10 million died from the lack of it than "the every living thing died" that is the only possible end result of it. Well the problem with dirty little secrets and lies is eventually they are discovered. Now, our worst one has become our worst fear, now every mad man on he planet has it. Are we happy now ?

-- Joel Rosen (Joel681@webv.net), June 15, 2000

Answers

You are right Joel. Sometimes I think back on the ridiculous "atomic attack" drills we did in grade school. You know, everyone get down and crawl under your desk with your hands over your head. Like that would really have helped any. Then there was Ronald Reagan with the BS that you could be safe from nuclear attack if you just had a hole, a door and someone to throw dirt over you. Who volunteers to be the last one shoveling dirt? Who was going to help him/her? It is all ridiculous and so dangerous. Still, like Pandora's box, it is out now and no one can bring it back and repack it in the box.

Nuclear attack is surviveable. It would not be pretty, and a door or desk won't do it, but it is surviveable. Still, the whole world would have been so much better off had nuclear research never been done.

-- Carmen (logcabin_now@yahoo.com), June 15, 2000.

Hi Joel and all you "nukies" :)

I agree with you Joel. We're lousy international cops. Leave it to the U.N. instead. They're fun to watch. Anyone who would go into a combat zone wearing a bright blue helmet has got to have their head examined.

And while we're at it, let's forget about the anti-missile system. 60 billion dollars spent since 1983 (Star Wars - Thank you Ronald.) and nothing to show for it. If I were the leader of one of the "rogue" nations that the Feds talk about, I certainly wouldn't waste my time spending billions of dollars trying to build a missle to hit the U.S. I could spend several thousand dollars to buy a shipping container and smuggle a warhead to any port of entry. After all, if cars, drugs, guns and people can be smuggled in and out of the U.S. in containers, what's the sweat with a little nuclear warhead. Add a little whiz-bang remote detonating device and you've got something straight out of James Bond. Except that the technology is available at your local Radio Shack.

So, to answer your question Joel, "are we happy now?" NO! I'm not. The genie is out of the bottle and will never be put back in. The weapons get smarter and the people using them are as dumb as they ever were. Not a very good combination.

(:raig

-- Craig Miller (CMIller@ssd.com), June 15, 2000.

Actually, Craig, I think that the 'rogue nations' have even cheaper and probably more effective weapons at their disposal -- biological and chemical weapons. Though I do agree that we would probably all have been better off if the atom had never been split.

-- Kathleen Sanderson (stonycft@worldpath.net), June 15, 2000.

Well Kathleen, bio and chem weapons are still very messy and expensive.

In case you haven't noticed, the weapon of choice for the 21st century is probably going to be electronic. Look what the "love bug" computer virus did. An estimated 2 billion dollars in damages and lost productivity from a bunch of amateurs. Why kill people with chemicals when disrupting society with electronic mayhem is soo much easier from the convenience of your own desktop. Any good hacker has, or has access to, a library of viruses that can fry your PC in seconds. I know I have. You just have to figure out how to erase or hide the electronic trail you leave behind everytime you log on. Being in the position I am, I have to know as much as your basic 14- year-old pimply-faced deviant to protect the computer network where I work. Like a dealer in Vegas. You have to know all the tricks.

Craig

-- Craig Miller (CMiller@ssd.com), June 15, 2000.

I completely agree that nuclear anything is the most unfortunate discovery we have made as a species. The nuetron bomb is truly disturbing, however, it isn't as easy to put to work from what I can gather.

Einstein said after the bombing of Japan, "Today physics has known sin." It's a problem that isn't going to go away no matter how many treaties we sign. The general lean of human nature is to destroy and conquer. A big dose of hatred and self-righteousness doesn't do anything to quash that tendency.

As for the UN addressing the World as it's police force, we pretty much are the UN. The only reason we don't have big white armored vehicles rolling down our streets everyday is that pesky little Second Ammendment that every blind person in this country wants to see strangled.

I agree with Kathleen that we have more to fear with chemical and biological warfare. It isn't really expensive at all. Just think how many people you could kill with two gallons of bleach and a gallon of ammonia in a high rise office buildings air conditioning system. Uh oh, now we must regulate and get a license with a signed affadavit in order to purchase bleach or ammonia!

I guess my point is that if someone is inclined to kill, they will find a way to do it no matter what. The greatest deterrent to nuclear weaponry is that it has such a good chance of affecting the detonators posterity as well.

-- Doreen (livinginskin@yahoo.com), June 15, 2000.

Its appears to me that the average joe that visits this site is a bit more optimistic (upbeat & religious or whatever) than you all seem to be here. It's a little hard to put the genie back into the bottle, and believe me, just about all knowledge that expands our understanding of the natural world is useful. I personally don't think that nuclear weapons are the way to go, but the underlying knowledge is extremely useful. Even as we speak there is development of lead-cooled nuclear reactors. These things are tiny in comparison to waht we use here in the US. The idea is that they are extremely efficient ("burning" nuclear waste from standard reactors-needing to be refueled only every 10-15 years) and the whole package is designed to recycle it's by-products. My point is that knowledge is a tool and the improtance is how you decide to use that tool, not whether the tool exists or not.

-- Chris Stogdill (cstogdill@rmci.net), June 15, 2000.

Well stated Chris,

Unfortunately, the public atmosphere towards nuclear technology here in the U.S. is so completely poisoned, I don't think the nuclear industry will ever recover. It will take several brownouts and blackouts of the electric grid before someone finally says "fossil fuel plants aren't going to make it either". It's incredible. While people angrily type out their frustrations in e-mails on electrically powered PC's, no one wants a new generating plant in their back yards. Everyone wants the pristine landscape while having access to unlimited amounts of energy. As a nation, we're in serious need of a reality check. There's not enough land for windmills and they only work when the wind is blowing. Solar energy is 4 times the cost of fossil fuel and only works during daylight hours. And the whole world wants what the U.S. has in terms of electrical conveniences. Something's gotta give.

I've drifted a bit off the orginal post, but I agree with your statement about knowledge being a tool. It is also like a double- edged sword. It is our master AND our slave.

(:raig

-- Craig Miller (CMiller@ssd.com), June 15, 2000.

I am no great fan of nuclear power either. However, I think the biggest threat to humankind is pollution caused by consumerism, overuse of antibiotics by humans and animals, and over-population. Even a self-sufficient homesteader can't escape the disastrous results of these things... It's not fair. As long as profit-driven corporations rule the world, our chances are pretty slim. Sorry, I got a little off-topic I believe.

-- Helen (bluechicken@wildbearnet.net), June 15, 2000.

Upbeat, positive, religious....generally I would answer yes to all of these, except for the upbeat...never much liked the cheerleader role! But we are talking about NUCLEAR technology. Not all knowledge is inherently good. Just because we can do something doesn't mean that we should.

Any technology that takes more than twenty lifetimes to partially decompose is not worth it at any cost. What good has come from it? Yes, life will continue, but with what kinds of negative effects?

As for the solar energy being 4 times the cost you are only taking the intitial outlay into account. What about the long term effects and measuring the full costs of things. Weigh decisions based on knowledge...all that can be found about nuclear energy is "It's Cheap!" and it will effect generations to come in ways we can't begin to imagine....measure the real costs of our actions, not just the $$$ outlay.

Craig, you're right. I don't want an electrical plant in my back yard. But by the way I have a small solar array...and as time progresses I will have MY OWN electrical plant and it won't have emmissions that cause the neighbors to have children with birth defects and it won't cause nearly the damage to the environment as fossil fuels. The batteries are the only thingn that will degrade the environment and if it came down to it, I would just use electricity while the sun shines.

To address the positive aspect mentioned, isn't that what striving towards self-reliance is all about? Leaving this place better than when we found it? That's what it means to me...What about you?

I don't know how anyone can examine nuclear technology and it's effects on life and come to the determination that it's ok. It's really not ok at all.Wow.

-- Doreen (livinginskin@yahoo.com), June 15, 2000.

I read a post about a 4 legged chicken today. My first question was "what nucluer power plant are you near ? Must be 3 mile island. As usual, Doreen, has written my thoughts much better than I could ! I'm seriously considering hiring her as my PR director. For those of you that support nucleur power--my first thought would be that we need people like you. Yes, indeed we need people to mop up the radio active water waste and clean up melt downs. There are some things so wild you could never in your wildest dreams hope to control and this is the main one of those !

-- Joel Rosen (Joel681@webtv.net), June 16, 2000.

Those who criticize missile defense systems need to talk to those who actually helped design, build and test them. In my 30 year career in aerospace, I worked on two such systems: Sprint and Brilliant Pebbles. Contrary to what you may have heard from those who,for their own reasons,wanted these systems killed, both of these systems worked. Often to the amazement of some of us who worked on them. The big failure was on the part of the American electorate who believed that peace at any price was better than living free at some cost.

-- John and Pat James (jjames@n-jcenter.com), June 16, 2000.

I have to applaud Joel for bringing to the fore these issues. Some of the most interesting discussions I've witnessed here start with a commentary from you, Joel. You sound like a very interesting person.

However, one point I would like to make -- Doreen, your comment about the US pretty much BEING the UN -- there are a few other countries out there that would disagree with you -- strenuously. The United Nations is bigger than "one", just as pretty much everything positive in this world is. I don't want to get into a debate about this, but I am disappointed with this attitude.

-- Tracy (trimmer@westzone.com), June 16, 2000.

Tracy, just check out the amounts of money and the "labor" put into the UN and consider the populations of the participating countries and you will see that the US is indeed pretty much the UN. I don't have all of the figures in my brain any longer, but I know that a few years ago it was more than %60 percent of the budget was from the US.

I don't see it as being a positive either; when the Secretary General of the UN says that he will cross any borders he wants to if he "feels" that there are human rights violations.

The idea of a nuetral place for leaders of the different countries of the world to get together and discuss things is a good one, but I am sure that Socrates would tell you that true democracies are a very dangerous thing. Also, Jesus Christ was a victim of majority rule...I believe in a democratic republic....meaning that we elect people to represent us that are not easily swayed from their adherence to an agreed upon set of values, ie. the Constitution of these United States, or the Magna Carta, or hopefully something noble!

Sorry if you're disappointed. I am disappointed on a daily basis with the news of the latest government land scam, the brutal murders, the lack of personal responsibility, the desire to remain ignorant, the proliferation of nuclear weaponry, the spread of genetically modified food, the cloning of humans (over a year ago scientists had achieved cloning of human "embryos", they gestate them in cattle and then kill them after 14 days...they say) and I don't see the UN doing anything but undermining the individual sovereignty of nations by laws that are not in compliance with these sovereign nation's laws.

The UN is very much like the US Government and it ain't positive.

This ability to have an open exchange of ideas is positive. The equalizing effect of the internet is positive. Our ability to remain civil while in complete disagreeance with each other is positive. Examining our preconceptions and checking our initial reactions is great! Use this medium as much as you can before the UN takes control of it!

-- Doreen (livinginskin@yahoo.com), June 16, 2000.

I'm going out on a limb here--but Jjames ? 20mm shells ? Tin ? Missles ? Let me put this in perspective. mixing tin with lead--isn't that a way to make "vest piercing shells" ? I think those are illegal. 20mm shells ?--Those are illegal for a private citizen, they belong to only the minute gun--I wonder whose name is on the patent for that one ? Defending missiles ? Need I say more ? Nice try, better luck next time !

-- Joel Rosen (Joel681@webtv.net), June 17, 2000.

It would comfort my soul greatly, if you listed your political affiliation with your post--like A.T.F.--F.B.I. or mine, Citizen of planet Earth !

-- Joel Rosen (Joel681@webtv.net), June 17, 2000.

I think Nuclear power is like the story of the California buckeye. California buckey produces Nuts that are full of deadly poison. Even so years ago the Native Americans found a way to make food out of it. First it must be roasted, Then ground into fine meal, Then put into a cloth sack, Then put into a running stream for a couple of months, then dried and used. The question is how many guys had to die to come up with a safe way to eat it. Can't you just picture the chief saying "alright who volunteers this time?" Or maybe the chief did what our federal government did, just fed the stuff to some unsuspecting person. The question is how close have we come to true safety, or are we still being used as guinea pigs. I hope that the end result will prove useful.

-- Little bit Farm (littlebit@calinet.com), June 17, 2000.

News Flash ! They found them ! Horse Hockey ! Sources close to me and whom I trust to give me reliable informaton tell me this is propoganda. Their report is-- they caught the thief before they could sell them. The theif came forward and had no idea what they had stolen. After realizing what they had, they returned the property. There will be no charges filed in order to keep this quiet ! I, for one, believe my source.

-- Joel Rosen (Joel681@webtv.net), June 18, 2000.

For those interested -- the UN publishes what monies are outstanding from member states....makes for an interesting read.

http://www.clw.org/pub/clw/un/uncrisis.html

-- Tracy (trimmer@westzone.com), June 18, 2000.

Where is their declaration of the amount of monies received and the amount of military, oh excuse me, police funds expended by each of the member nations?

-- Doreen (livinginskin@yahoo.com), June 18, 2000.

Hello Joel If you want some real insight into the "dirty little secrets" read Rule by Secrecy" written by Jim Marrs.

-- Mark Windbiel (mwindbiel@hotmail.com), June 20, 2000.

Hi Joel, I don't understand some of your posts (what's a "minute gun"?), but I'd like to comment about your response to "JJames" re 20mm, "vest-piercing shells" and etc. The media hysteria over body- armor-piercing bullets the last couple years was just that. Any deer rifle will fire through standard body armor without special bullets (like teflon-coated or with depleted uranium cores). Outlawing "cop- killer armor-piercing bullets" is one of those things that sounds reasonable but is in reality just a back-door attempt to circumvent the second amendment and get rid of private firearms. As for 20mm, that's literally a cannon.

Back to the original topic: I was a fighter pilot (go ahead, ask me about missiles and 20mm's), and for a time in a squadron with a tactical nuclear mission. It was an alarming education, and I'm surprised that some terrorist government or organization hasn't yet used a tactical nuke. Two people could put one in the trunk of a car. Delivery isn't the problem; a boat, car, or Cessna 150 would work. They might have to settle for a surface burst (as opposed to the optimum height above the ground), but the potential damage is still incomprehensible. A nuclear explosion IS surviveable - people lived in the epicenter of Hiroshima and Nagasaki - and Ronald Reagans's foxhole-with-overhead-cover is the best average people can do. But it's a nightmare to imagine. I, too, wish the technology had never come to fruition, but if wishes were horses then beggars would ride. Our terrorist problems will only increase, and we have to figure out how to defend ourselves without giving up our freedom.

-- Brad (Rodent@worldpath.net), June 22, 2000.