Global warming - thinking the unthinkable

nice idea, but it'll take ages, and Blair is getting the push before summer. Can you sort out a few test sample nukes over the weekend please? We need full production ready for the merest hint of a terror attack on uk, they blow up a bus and we take reprisals viz extermination of all inhabitants of asia, middle east, africa and america.

ta
 
Explanation of the word \"nazi\" for awol

Nazi is short for "National Socialists". So very definitely,they were left of centre. Won power from massive working class votes in depths of 30's depression, cured mass enemployment with large public works such as building the autobahns.

This isn't your strong suit is it?
 
No problem at all, I'll get onto Mahmoud right away, he's always keen to help with such matters.

I'll meet you for some sushi on Friday to discuss these plans further and iron out any problems ahead of Monday's test. Incidentally, where do you intend to carry out the testing? I would personally like to see Birmingham wiped out so maybe we could try it up there, what do you think, it might speed up the M6 a little.
 
Birmingham raises far too many suspicions. The current in-place for woops nuclear stuff is definitely Moscow, tsk look what they've gone and done now dearie me etc.

But actually, your techno record is pretty good so if you say they work it's good enough for me. I mean, a rubbishy nuke is still, yerknow,a bit lethal, really? I never understood why we couldn't keep something ooer flaky like a rusty Polaris which might go off at any moment, much more dangerous if the starter wires corroded etc, and save the money.

Anyway, full production, and ditch the tests. Note that "Tests" haven't helped N korea much either. ooh- we could blame them?
 
Re: Woeful shorttermism

Despite it's apparent attractions, TCM's 'at a stroke global warming policy' suffers from a number of flaws. Firstly, if the 'population reduction programme' were carried out by nukes then the nukes themselves would probably create rather more carbon, rather more quickly than we have space for at present. Secondly, the population we'd be targetting are those who show the potential for more carbon production, rather than er ourselves, who are actually producing it now. So a reduced world population would just either carry on as now, producing more carbon annually and/or the 'nuke survivors' would turn to cheap/more polluting ways of recovering wealth. Thirdly, any 'scorched earth' strategy would cause a total collapse of the international fianancial markets, effectively pushing the 'west' back into the 19th century before it inevitably, recovers to act the same way again. So not even a medium term policy really. But of course, given that the basis of the planned action is ultimately selfishness, we could just not worry about it very much. If we do worry, sadly the only alternative is to turn the bomb on ourselves. Whilst this is far more logical in the 'final analysis' it's unlikely to be a vote winner.
Another option is to follow Deleted User's kamakaze strategy (see Lounge) of buying a new 'guzzler' 4x4 and being as ungreen as possible in order to 'show the middle finger' to those who preach more cautious energy use. Probably best to breed billions of MikeFs then and accelerate the inevitable.

Much better to raise a few taxes under the guise of being green and then keep the masses happier with a few new school books about the environment - and just hope they don't get beyond GCSE level.
 
Rivers of Polonium

The idea of the neutron bomb is to kill loads of people with a massive dose of radioactive material. So although I used the term "nuke" there need be no blast as with conventional nuke, and hence no fallout.

It might be more appropriate to think of these as "Polonium Burgers". An ideal route as proposed by Brendan would be to attack the fresh water supply.

As for collapse of fincial markets, yep. But what would so rubbish about reverting the 19th century and have a better shot at the 20th century all over again but with better technology and drugs?

Financially, after an initial collapse the future potential of lots of things would be very good indeed. And we'd have plenty of technology to help us too.

I suppose house prices would also crash to a tenth or so which i admit for North London types itself constitutes disaster on unimaginable scale. Altho one could eventually have lots of houses all over the planet nice and cheap. Or of course there would be lots of un-owned nice houses in St John's Wood hem hem? Oh alright then, also Islington.

After the event, we'd need regulation of dis-established church and max 2 kids per family to ensure no need to repeat the episode. Or of course, if not, just repeat the episode in another few hundred years.

I also don't believe that either the "cautious green" nor "extravagnance" options are very different: loads of people have a *fairly* giantish car but with not *quite* the giant lunatic v12 option and as far as i know this applies to zefender and Deleted User too.

Anywaym we're past the handwringing stage as mooselet is hard at work on the actual devices.
 
Re: Explanation of the word \"nazi\" for awol

I don't think it's the strong suit for this forum either. The concepts involved are too complex to be summed up in the limited space available here and with the limited attention spans of the likes of us.

Just for the record, I do read the Guardian..... and the Times, The Telegraph, Viz, Private Eye and The Beano.

But never, ever, The Daily Mail (Makes sign of Cross and bedecks self with garlic)
 
Politicians are self-serving and they are fully aware that the planet and all who populate it are doomed. The population will expire a long time before the planet. So planning for the future is irrelevant.
NULabr are planning for the next few elections so that they can be in charge for as long as possible, because that's why you enter politics. The fact that the truth will at some point dawn on the rest of us is going to held off until the mantle of power can be shifted to another political party.

On a world scale Plan B has had a rocky ride.
The Ebola Virus never really got off the ground,
HIV was promising until they realised that they couldn't control it.
Famine looks pretty promising too and as long as they can keep civil wars raging there'll be no chance of overcoming the crop failures and consequent results.
Bird Flu was a great idea, but they couldn't blame the birds if the pesky buggers didn't fly to the right places.
Polonium has been a disaster.

Problem is that our Leaders need to get a better control of the media and the internet to ensure that the correct message gets put about.

Just a minute, the door bell......................................
 
Suspect a neutron bomb would be quite inadaquate for such a demanding task.

Perhaps some form of genetic engineering?
 
Re: IQ tests

[ QUOTE ]
Surey not realistic to hold IQ tests, is it? Course not, it would take ages. And we ned a few stupid peopel to do gardening and so on.

No big deal but IQ values are based on western-style abstact numercay instead of how to carry water on your head, body-daubing or fish-spearing, and so the geographical zoning is the best way to the quick (and secret) first strike.

IMHO

[/ QUOTE ]

Judging by the spelling on the above post, stupid people are sometimes prone to post utter rubbish on here! /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
 
<<....No problem at all, I'll get onto Mahmoud right away...>>

This is too serious a topic to start talking about personal proclivities...

John
 
Shurely unthinking the thinkable??? And by the way no-one under 40 needs an explanation of Nazis. That's all they've taught in School History lessons since abt 1970
 
Force10 fails the IQ test?

Typographical errors are not an indicator of stupidity. And it would be a stilted forum indeed if every post with such errors was ridiculed in the way you have done.

Next time, you could consider your contribution a little more carefully before merely exerting the dead hand of pedantry on an otherwise upbeat out-of-season thread.

Indeed, your failure to consider the context might show the limitations of your own intellectual athleticism? It's similar to the behaviour of a precocious child who correctly (yet tiresomely) can only comment on the bad manners of others - instead of take a worthwhile part in the conversation. I'm sure you could have done better than that.
 
yep, my two kids have been thru it. It's all santitised and distant tho - it is not explained that Hitler polled more votes than Blair, for example, which for many is a frighteningly relevant aspect of the era. It's just left neatly that he somehow "seized"power, which (initially) he did not, and somehow the view that he was always unpopular has allowed to drift through.

Awol's view howevr is not unusual. It may come from the quite leftish-leaning BBC which uses casual phrases like "right-wing dictatorship" as though all ruthless gittishness is invariably right wing.

Just for the record, my own genocidal proposals are firmly rooted in the Centre Ground. Oh yes they are. I am furrowing my eyebrows in amazement that anyone could think otherwise - these are difficult decisions which have to be taken etc blah
 
Rewriting of history is going on as we write. I saw a film script by a German woman recently which depicted all the little Osties being pleased and gemuthlich with each other when they were allowed West. I pointed out to her that I was there and my memory of it was that they all wore stonewashed denim and were desperate to buy diy tools while not a one of them trusted another one inch (just as well since abt 50% were stasi spies). I was immediately written off as a fascist. Something to do with telling the truth, I'm afraid. Some people only want palatable truths.
 
Top