Should the US use nuclear warfare again?
- Only as a last alternative. Otherwise no! The U.S. is under the impression they can't be beat (they have been once re Vietnam) and were attacked on native soil by terrorists. There are those in the rest of the world that would retaliate if the U.S. attacked them first.
- No. The USA do not want any more innocent lives lost, that's why they banned nuclear warfare. Instead, the rely on high tech surgical warfare using highly advanced weapons to accurately destroy the 'real' opponents rather than sacrificing innocent lives through weapons of mass destruction and risking the end of the world.
- Also the USA can be beat, if they lost against the Viet Cong then they could loose to most countries. The USA think they control the world. Britain is most likely the country not to beat in a war (a war not an atomic war) because all they have to defend is a small island and Britain haven't lost a war in over 200 years.
There has not been nuclear warfare. There have been two nuclear attacks. Nuclear warfare denotes the use of nuclear weapons by both or all opposing sides. The only use of nuclear weapons in warfare were the two bombings by the US of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and it was the intent of the US to bring WW2 with Japan to a quicker conclusion.
Thermonuclear warfare is the use of nuclear weapons in war, either tactically or strategically. Although the term "thermonuclear" technically applies only to the process of fusion, the term is loosely applied to conflict involving fission weapons, fusion weapons, or both (informal synonyms are "atomic war" or "nuclear war").
Julian Perry Robinson has written: 'Public Health Response to Biological and Chemical Weapons' 'The effects of weapons on ecosystems' -- subject(s): Biological warfare, Chemical warfare, Environmental aspects, Environmental aspects of Biological warfare, Environmental aspects of Chemical warfare, Environmental aspects of Military weapons, Environmental aspects of Nuclear weapons, Environmental aspects of War, Military weapons, Nuclear weapons, War 'The United States binary nerve-gas programme' -- subject(s): Asphyxiating and poisonous Gases, Chemical weapons, Military policy, War use 'Chemical…
Is it true or false in Excel you should create worksheets as if you are going to use them only once?
That is false. You should create them in such a way that they can be used again, so that when formulas work, you can use different values in the cells that they reference. That is false. You should create them in such a way that they can be used again, so that when formulas work, you can use different values in the cells that they reference. That is false. You should create them in such…
Nuclear energy is very strictly licensed, and I can't see it ever being acceptable to have dangerous nuclear waste on the roads in private cars. The only suitable form of transport to use nuclear would be in ships, but again it would need to be strictly controlled-can you imagine a ship captured by pirates and being ransomed?
The nuclear arms race was a competition for supremacy in nuclear warfare between the United States, the Soviet Union, and their respective allies during the Cold War. Starting with the scientific breakthroughs of the 1930s which made their development possible, and continuing through the nuclear arms race and nuclear testing of the Cold War, the issues of proliferation and possible use for terrorism still remain in the early 21st century.
When a substance, compound or element is found, man begins to think no how to use it for warfare. Some scientist discovered nuclear acting components like Marie Currie and the heads went up thinking about the nuclear bomb. Germany thought about it first but the United States beat them to it and used it against Japan.
The source of nuclear power is the nucleus of an atom; any atom. As long as there is mass in the universe there will be a source of nuclear power. Even if in the future we run out of the radioactive material we currently use to fuel nuclear power plants, it would be foolish to assume that we will never again be able to harness nuclear energy in another way.