I think it might have originally been a 50:50 call between CE and space. Sure it discusses technology, but only in the sense of "what bomb do we use, and what would be its effects". The obvious political slant of the original movie link makes it a clear political post, and hence CE, imho.
It doesn't discuss rocketry or manned or unmanned space flight. It doesn't discuss the technology itself - merely the side effects - exagerated or not. It's certainly political - through and through, like a stick of rock.
Once the swearing and the catfight started, then it should have been a no-brainer to move it off Space Science - our flagship board. I suspect Flame is the best place for it, given the language - it's more acceptable there.
Space/Science » in reply to *Nick, why do you feel this is off topic?
re: *Nick, why do you feel this is off topic?
The whole thread (64 posts)
- UCS on nuclear bunker-busting
- re: B61-11
- Well I sure hope this guy understands what fallout could do!
- When you guys have finished with the foul language, can we have this on CE, please? (n/t)
- *Nick, why do you feel this is off topic?
- re: *Nick, why do you feel this is off topic?
- I think this is on-topic....
- Pardon the language please Nick.
- *Nick, why do you feel this is off topic?
- Are they stupid or what?
- yes Lee, we know you could give a shit about brown people.
- Lee has a point.
- Sure, if you're an effin idiot. (how's that MB?)
- Surprisingly reserved... ;) (n/t)
- The bunker buster is by it's very nature a subsurface device.
- Your ignorance is astounding
- Speaking of an effing idiot....
- 20 feet?
- Hell of a difference, Lee
- No, et is correct, and you are an idiot....
- And the obligitory wikipedia article.
- And here's a more "nuclear" specific source that claims 10 yards.
- 20 feet of concrete.
- 20 feet?
- Sure, if you're an effin idiot. (how's that MB?)
- **Mind the language, et** (n/t)
- Lee has a point.
- yes Lee, we know you could give a shit about brown people.
