Neutron Bomb

No “Enhanced Radiation Warheads” currently in the U.S. arsenal. Other western countries have also built a couple (esp France), but have scrapped them during the 1980’s or at the end of the Cold War. One of the U.S. applications were SAMs like the Standard series or Sprint; the other applications was short-range battlefield ballistic missiles like the Lance.
China might be the only country fielding such a warhead today – the warhead of the DF-31 is said to be jazzed-up copy of the W-70 warhead which is said to have been stolen by China from the LLNL (see the link “House.gov – Cox Report”).

http://www.nuclearfiles.org/reatomicbasics/020109neutronbomb.htm
http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/aureview/1979/jul-aug/snow.html
http://taiwansecurity.org/NYT/NYT-990514.htm
http://www.house.gov/coxreport/cont/gncont.html

and do you know how many reserves the russians can muster? take a guess

the americans might have plenty of hardware and plenty of guns, but how is the american GI Joe’s GUT when it comes to *real* fighting?

so, dionis & flex, is this an honor on the battlefield thing?
Going 1v1?
Why do that when you save YOUR team’s lives by being stronger?
Sure send in 100 if the opponent has 100? Right.

american conventional forces arent all that wonderful, when was the last time the US went 1v1 with even a HALF equal opponent?

That is correct, dionis, but we also have to consider that US military potential has huge reserves compared to the fraction we have seen during DS, OIF or similar operations. One might not like it much, but they remain the strongest conventional force on this planet.

american conventional forces arent all that wonderful, when was the last time the US went 1v1 with even a HALF equal opponent?

all nuclear weapons to me are big time BS, undesirable, ugly, stupid, stinky and every single bad name in existence and including those bad names yet to be invented. 😡 (this goes also for those who invented them and those who still make money with them)
sorry but i hate nukes with passion
Camaro.

Nuclear weapons helped to save millions of lifes simply by preventing the Cold War from breaking out into a gigantic conventional worldwide conflict.
Now the Cold War is over, thanks God that both sides had nukes..

Even themselves being intended for massive destruction purposes, they got their place on history pedestal.

Today nukes serve as counter-balance for the overwhelming conventional advantage of the United States military. Nations like Syria, Libya, Iran or Nothern Korea are striving hard to develop ICBMs with nuclear warheads, capable to reach the US coast as a safe prevention of an invasion similar to the Operation Iraqi Freedom.. The same goes to Pakistani nukes against the advantage of conventional Indian Armed Forces..

all nuclear weapons to me are big time BS, undesirable, ugly, stupid, stinky and every single bad name in existence and including those bad names yet to be invented. 😡 (this goes also for those who invented them and those who still make money with them)
sorry but i hate nukes with passion
Camaro.

i think nukes should only be used against alien motherships and incoming earth-threatening asteroids.

the n-bomb radiation is not so persistent, that effect happens when the neutrons collide with specifics atoms and produce radiactive isotopes (like cobalt,cecium,uranium=stroncium-iode etc),but with other atoms like carbon, silicium,nitrogen, iron (low cycle radiation isotopes), and others doesnt make significant residual radiation

all nuclear weapons to me are big time BS, undesirable, ugly, stupid, stinky and every single bad name in existence and including those bad names yet to be invented. 😡 (this goes also for those who invented them and those who still make money with them)
sorry but i hate nukes with passion
Camaro.

It stays for very long time considering human life periods..

so which is the most destructive bomb??? thermonuclear??

but, what happens with the affected area?
doesnt radiation stays there for a few billion years? or it just desappears? vanishes? :confused: (i need some explanation please 🙂 )
in any case, if radiation stays it would render the neutron bomb…

the most ridiculous non-sense in universal history 😡
taking the crown from the A and the H bombs respectively.
Camaro

Thanks fjaj, where you find that information????, i dont know if it use an small A bomb like detonating, or use the graser in an deuterium-tritium target(like the inertial confinement fusion experiments -SHIVA,NOVA,OMEGA neutron-litium collition)

Quoting:
“The neutron bomb, or “enhanced radiation warhead” as it is called in scientific circles, is basically a hydrogen bomb without the uranium-238 jacket which would absorb neutrons to increase the blast. By eliminating that jacket the full fusion emission of neutrons is released. A one-kiloton neutron bomb will spread a lethal dose of neutron radiation to exposed people over a one-mile radius. It would take a 13-kiloton fission (atom) bomb to produce a combined lethal dose of neutron and gamma radiation over that same distance. Although the lethal radius for people inside tanks would be somewhat less because of the protection, pure neutron radiation is more penetrating than a mixture of neutron and gamma, and the lethal radius would be greater for a one-kiloton neutron bomb than for a 13- kiloton fission warhead. But the radius of destruction from blast and heat would be considerably less for the former.”