>Show me a link about such tests. As far as I recall, there have been no tests of nuclear >explosives above ground since about the time I was in kindergarten.
The test in question occured in 1957, on July 19th, specifically during Operation Plumbob. Five Air Force officers and a photographer stood directly beneath the explosion of an Air-2 Genie nuclear air-to-air rocket. They suffered no damage. The photographer took this picture of them: http://calitreview.com/images/atomic_bomb_volunteers_genie.jpg > > > > Or, as I've demonstrated, unless the fight occurs at such conditions > > where you don't have meaningful collateral damage - in space, in the > > atmosphere, in the sea, and in uninhabited areas (deserts etc.) > > You ain't demonstrated diddly squat. (And aside from extra-lunar open > space, all of your targets will have collateral damage -- yes, people live > in some of those untracked wastelands of sand or water). > > No doubt there's some places on earth were they do live in deserts and on water. But there's plenty of places where there's not a living person within 300 meters. > > > Why would such an agency want one? Such explosives can not be used in > defense, so it's a crap investment. > > I don't say nobody can own private nuclear explosives. They have proper > engineering uses. If I hear of anybody threatening to explode one that will > harm sentient life, it's a self-defense issue. > > Gospodin, I'm starting to think you have no more clue about the Zero > Aggression Principle than an agent of the IRS. Bombs (whether conventional > or nuclear) are sloppy. They kill uninvolved bystanders. Bullets are > specific. They kill only what you aim them at. You can't use a bomb to > defend yourself or others. Bombs are tools of governments and other > terrorists. > > Please explain this to me. I am allowed, within the ZAP, to detonate nuclear bombs for engineering purposes, is that correct? I am allowed to own explosives of any amount and type, is that correct? And so, I am allowed to blow up - for example - a stick of dynamite, or an atomic bomb, on my own property? I am allowed to own an Orion rocket, am I right? It is sufficient, for the purposes of the ZAP, that I do not harm anybody or their property with these bombs? Let us suppose, then, I am attacked by Mutant Zombie Bikers. I am allowed to kill the mutant zombie bikers with my gun, I can bite them if I so choose, right? My argument is solely that nobody should - in a free society - care how precisely I kill the Mutant Zombie Bikers, as long as you and your property are not damaged by it. If I fire a rocket or a grenade at the MZBs, and none of the shrapnel flies over to your property and damages it, then there's no way you can demonstrate, under the ZAP, that I have violated your rights. Nuclear weapons should operate on the same principle.
