Plans to nuke BP oil spill gathers steam

ThreeWords

New member
Feb 27, 2009
5,179
0
0
deadman91 said:
YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES!

That'd be awesome! And you yanks'd finally use your nukes instead of just letting them sit and collect cobwebs.

Who knows what other issues can be solved with nukes?
You know what occurs to me? The use of nukes here goes horribly wrong, and when America is reeling from irradiated water supplies, fallout and loss of marine life in the gulf, people will finally realize that having nukes is a stupid idea.

Despite the implied suffering in my idea, I think this might somehow turn out to be a good plan...

Also, is only me who becomes suspicious when the Russians start advising the Americans to nuke their own territory? They 'apparently' used the nukes, but it sounds a little too like them pushing the USA closer to the brink. Right now the Kremlin is probably praying the they fall for it
 

Shadowed Intent

New member
Jul 5, 2009
70
0
0
bad rider said:
Shadowed Intent said:
The number of people who are so ignorant and brainwashed into thinking nukes are not to ever be used irritates me a great deal, did they not read the thread?! It has been done 5 times with a 80% success rate and that was in the 80s, modern nukes are more efficient and reliable, it is worth a try.
Actually considering there original purpose, despite 70 odd years of development, they are still only 100% efficient at killing people. That's a zero percent increase than what they originally were.
I meant efficient in terms of nuclear fuel spent in detonation and limitations on radiation expelled, also, no weapon is 100% efficient at killing.
 

havass

New member
Dec 15, 2009
1,298
0
0
Irridium said:
Perhaps this is why you should have, oh whats the word... a contingency plan for this kind of thing!

Does no one have any foresight?
They HAD a fail-safe plan in case the oil pipe bursts..
Which failed.

[sub]Oh, the irony.[/sub]
 

Vorlayn

New member
Jun 3, 2010
90
0
0
Hmmm, so we'll be eating glowing fish soon? Yummy! Should also be much easier to fish em up....
Creating another disaster just to solve the first one...sigh.
 

monalith

New member
Nov 24, 2008
112
0
0
XJ-0461" post="18.199475.6532092 said:
"We've got some kind of problem in the Gulf of Mexico"

"Throw a nuke at it, that should sort things out"

Seriously, who thinks of these things?..quote]

obviously someone who has stopped more oil leakages then you.
 

Captain Pancake

New member
May 20, 2009
3,453
0
0
Damn my parents for having almost all of our shares in BP. Damn Obama for standing against the dividends being paid out to the investors. Looks like I won't be seeing a university education...
 

veratixx

New member
Mar 25, 2010
44
0
0
El Poncho said:
Here is what I think we should do, inspired by Patrick:p


God, this had me laughing for hours xD

anyhow.. nuking the thing there.. let's hope they do it in a rather fun way
(luring fishes that swallowed mininukes into the hole and let them explode from a distance, suicide dolphins etc...)
 

Ironic Pirate

New member
May 21, 2009
5,544
0
0
Where's neonbob? This should make him happy, they'll probably take out a few whales along with Mississippi, Alabama and Lousiana.

Also, there's some good news and some bad news. Good news, BP found that mermaids are real.

Bad news, they're extinct.
 

bad rider

The prodigal son of a goat boy
Dec 23, 2007
2,252
0
0
Shadowed Intent said:
bad rider said:
Shadowed Intent said:
The number of people who are so ignorant and brainwashed into thinking nukes are not to ever be used irritates me a great deal, did they not read the thread?! It has been done 5 times with a 80% success rate and that was in the 80s, modern nukes are more efficient and reliable, it is worth a try.
Actually considering there original purpose, despite 70 odd years of development, they are still only 100% efficient at killing people. That's a zero percent increase than what they originally were.
I meant efficient in terms of nuclear fuel spent in detonation and limitations on radiation expelled, also, no weapon is 100% efficient at killing.
That's what those lazy scientists want you to think.
 

C_sector

Senior Member
Jan 7, 2010
550
0
21
Gender
Male
Wow first that particle accelerator that makes black holes for kicks and now nuking the ocean.....Seems like the end of the world is approaching. :-P
 

crimson5pheonix

It took 6 months to read my title.
Legacy
Jun 6, 2008
36,166
3,376
118
IzisviAziria said:
crimson5pheonix said:
But the pressure wave is still going to kill everything in a good distance.
and so is millions of gallons of crude oil leaking out into the gulf for another 4 months.
Which is why they should just cap the damn thing! Is it going to be difficult? Yes. Can it be done? Yes.
 

MASTACHIEFPWN

Will fight you and lose
Mar 27, 2010
2,279
0
0
Blowing it up would creat one problem area over 3, but still, It can't be nuclear, it needs to be just, well... "One crossed wire, one wayward pinch of potassium chlorate, one errant twitch...and kablooie!"
 

Adamc-mh

New member
Jun 6, 2010
328
0
0
e2density said:
deadman91 said:
YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES!

That'd be awesome! And you yanks'd finally use your nukes instead of just letting them sit and collect cobwebs.

Who knows what other issues can be solved with nukes?
*Cough* Climate Change *Cough*



LMAO
 

Ickorus

New member
Mar 9, 2009
2,887
0
0
Crypticonic said:
Wow first that particle accelerator that makes black holes for kicks and now nuking the ocean.....Seems like the end of the world is approaching. :-P
Im gonna be pissed if those 2012 fanatics are right.

[small]EDIT: This is really starting to look like me bumping my own thread when it's dying, I assure you that isn't the case.[/small]
 

Vuljatar

New member
Sep 7, 2008
1,002
0
0
Ah, the Michael Bay solution. Classic.

Seriously though, why the hell haven't they deployed those oil-eating microbes yet?