You get to detonate a nuclear bomb

[Cwanky 17,445]

Let's just say I'm a big fan of Mythbusters, who are known for their propensity towards explosions:

 

 

So yes given its done in a safe isolated setting, where I'm far far away I would ignite a nuke given the opportunity. Jamie and Adam sure would if they had that chance. Might throw in several Busters too to top off such an explosion.

[Luna'sLoyalist 0]

I definitely would. it would be epic!!!! Well as long as people aren't playing Nuke Town on Call of Duty: Black ops when I am supposed to trigger it.

[Zoop 8,384]

Toss me into the morally uptight group of judgmental stiffs that would decline and glare disapprovingly at anyone that lines up to take part.

 

I mean, really... what's the point? You've pressed a button and made a massive explosion. Was pressing the button satisfying? Did it make you happy? Did it feel good? Why the excitement? Why the fanfare? You just released a ton of nasty stuff around our already woefully polluted planet. Was it worth the momentary glee that may have occurred as a result of witnessing a big boom?

 

I mean... I just really don't get it, even as a person that enjoys things like shooting at ranges and reading about weapons and weapon development.

 

Gawd, look at me getting so grim and serious in a thread like this. Such a party pooper, I am.

[SCS 7,443]

No, I would not. Even if no one would be harmed by the nuclear bomb, it is a perversion and a disgusting affront against life. It rips apart atoms, which is one of the core building blocks of physical reality as we know it. It is a tool that I wish did not exist. Following from that, I am only okay with it being used when absolutely necessary. For example, in World War II, we could have chosen to drop the atomic bombs on Japan, or let the war continue. If we let the war continue, millions more people on each side of the conflict would have died. While atomic weaponry is evil, we had to choose the lesser evil, and the lesser evil was using the atomic bomb on Japan to end the war sooner.

[Cwanky 17,445]

Because some men aren't looking for anything logical, like money. They can't be bought, bullied, reasoned, or negotiated with. Some men just want to watch the world burn.

 

[Jokuc 8,172]

NO! Absolutely not! Never ever even if I got money from doing it.

 

I don't know about you guys but I don't like war. I mean even though no one gets hurt it's like if I would support it. Even if it's a test the thing is made to destroy and kill. I do not see the fun in it. We're talking about how our planet is dying and how we should take care of the environment. Detonating a nuclear bomb just hurts the planet more with a big explosion and radiation that will stick around for like 3 billion years or something.

 

And even if there were no radiation, I'd be worried since if one country *cough US, cough* does a lot of nuclear tests, the rest of the world will just be concerned.

[Cerbyrus 63]

No, because, first of all, it doesn't have any use at all. There is also a chance of actual radiation coming free, even on testing grounds. Also, I'm against war and the use of nuclear weaponry. Why would I test something that would indirectly results in thousands, if not millions of deaths. I'd feel responsible if I tested a weapon that later on would be used to absolutely demolish whole cities, even though it's just a test. And come on, nuclear bombs have and most likely will never be used for good.

[Mephala 2,632]

The fact that people here are saying yes saddens me, even if anyone is kidding, especially since I see people saying they wouldn't care about the aftermath, even if other species were to be hurt. Nuclear warfare is twisted; we are doing unnatural things with the resources we are provided and these things should not be encouraged in any form.

 

People think it's "cool" to press a button and watch as you completely obliterate homes of all sorts of animals? (Note that people are animals as well, as much as we don't accept that and treat ourselves as gods.) Maybe some people think that it's easy to clean up after this, and it's not-it can take hundreds of years and it only takes moments.

 

Just because it looks "fun" or "cool" doesn't make it right. I am anti-war, so that is a contributing factor, but it's strange that anyone would condone this.

Edited August 17, 2013 by PinkieDaShy

[Alex Kennedy 1,228]

I'd just have the thing disarmed. Even if no-one gets hurt, the effects it has on the environment are disastrous. I don't want to watch something blow up that badly.

[Mand'alor Dash 2,224]

The best weapon is one you never have to use. The next best is one you only have to use once.

 

Mushroom clouds are pretty freakin' cool. It'd be a lot of fun to detonate a bomb and watch one rise in real life. Most likely with a selection of Ink Spots music playing in the background.

[Golurk 467]

Nope. If they were going to blow up a nuke, they'd have a good reason for it. Most likely, that reason would be a test to make future nukes more powerful. Unless I'm mistaken, no one died from the US's test detonations in the West and Pacific, yet those tests made the nukes we made after that much more powerful. So while no one would die from that particular blast, it would directly contribute to the destructive power of future bombs, which could bring about even greater loss of life. 

 

Aside from that, there's also the radiation to worry about, which can stick around for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. Factor in how far the radioactive material can go, and that itself is reason enough to not want to.

 

Even if it was a theoretical antimatter bomb that would have the same power, but without the radiation, I'd say my first reason is reason enough to not want to. Every test makes us more able. Normally that's good, but in this context, that should be avoided at all costs.

[HunterScars 505]

yes it would be quite amazing to see the actual explosion and its affects on the landscape its sheer power would be awe inspiring 

[Commissar Alexer 763]

No. I wouldn't waste nuke like that. A-bombs are enormously expensive.

Sure it's sounds awesome and nobody gets hurt but still, it would be a real shame to waste such a powerful weapon like that.

[James 302]

I still cannot believe that there are people here who think that nuclear weapons would be 'fun'. Who'd have thought that bronies could create and participate in the most disgusting thread I've ever seen.

 

No. I wouldn't waste nuke like that. A-bombs are enormously expensive.

Sure it's sounds awesome and nobody gets hurt but still, it would be a real shame to waste such a powerful weapon like that.

 

Wait, wait, are you saying that you would rather use it on someone!? Yes, killing thousands of people and levelling a city is much better than wasting money.

[Cerbyrus 63]

I still cannot believe that there are people here who think that nuclear weapons would be 'fun'. Who'd have thought that bronies could create and participate in the most disgusting thread I've ever seen.

I completely agree. It's disgusting to see how people would actually want to set it off, whether on a testing field or in an actual battle. I would actually rather see that EVERY type of nuclear weapon would be destroyed, then that they would all be used on a testing field.

 

But sadly, that will never happen, knowing humans.

[Outkin 35]

No. We don't need to resort to such drastic measures, we don't need to use or even test these. For one what needs to be tested? Do we not have enough proof that these things are indeed lethal?

[James 302]

I completely agree. It's disgusting to see how people would actually want to set it off, whether on a testing field or in an actual battle. I would actually rather see that EVERY type of nuclear weapon would be destroyed, then that they would all be used on a testing field.

 

But sadly, that will never happen, knowing humans.

 

If all of them are ever disposed of completely, then humanity will truly be as advanced as we seem to think we are. I don't believe it will ever happen though, deterrence theory is the problem, even as outdated and obsolete as it is, deterrence theory is now the only reason these weapons exist. Each country that has them fears that they would be vulnerable if they were to ever get rid of them, but realistically, they'll never be used in war, we all know their effects are too extreme. No leader in the world would be the one to cause that much death and destruction.

[Cerbyrus 63]

If all of them are ever disposed of completely, then humanity will truly be as advanced as we seem to think we are. I don't believe it will ever happen though, deterrence theory is the problem, even as outdated and obsolete as it is, deterrence theory is now the only reason these weapons exist. Each country that has them fears that they would be vulnerable if they were to ever get rid of them, but realistically, they'll never be used in war, we all know their effects are too extreme. No leader in the world would be the one to cause that much death and destruction.

Let's just hope it stays like that. Because I would litterally have enough of the world if such a thing were to happen, and the leader would've not been arrested or something.

 

But hey, you're probably right ^^

[Harmonic Revelations 8,833]

No because Nuclear testing has been illegal for quite some years due to the environmental damage that it causes, and I just wouldn't take the risk of getting arrested. Not to mention the waste of the huge amount of money it takes to make a nuclear weapon.

Edited August 21, 2013 by Harmonic Revelations

[Loriem 639]

I would, because 1: It would peeve of the U.N. and 2. Big booms are fun!!

 

Also, if I was already there, I would have probably gone through all the career aspects to get the authority to do so.

[Rayalicious 435]

OFC it sounds awesome but before detonating it id  throw in a couple of stuff that i despise (including somme ppl XD) then go in outer space and take a pic of the huge smoke mushroom 

 

i tried it before  with some home made napalm   can give recepie if u want

[Commissar Alexer 763]

Wait, wait, are you saying that you would rather use it on someone!? Yes, killing thousands of people and levelling a city is much better than wasting money.

 

No. I know about the destructive power those weapons possess and the massive environmental damaged they would cause but i would rather conquer a country then completely destroy it. Also if i would start using A-bombs on nations, not only would i have the enitre world against me but also it would cause a MAD situation. Mutually Assured Destruction.

 

Nope, they are just an effective way to demonstrate power because who would invade an nuclear armed country?

[Lateon 588]

As my friend Tristana puts it perfectly: "Look at the pretty explosions!"

 

You are talking to the man who got into science by watching people blow stuff up with science. Of course I would do it.

 

I would also try to put other things like cars and stuff near it and see how far they fly, because that amuses me also.

[Flutter's lover <3 8,204]

Been there, done that.

 

 

If I was on some secluded island with no life or anything on it, maybe.Other wise probably not. I'm not one for "war" or anything to do with it.

[Goose 181]

Nope, no sense in polluting the area with radiation and fallout for another 50 years. I couldn't even look at the explosion or I'd be blinded.

 

I'd rather detonate a large conventional bomb.