After reading Memorial Day, by Vince Flynn (In which a terrorist nuclear bomb is dumped in Mt. Weather, an emergency command bunker, to explode but be contained.), it occured to me: Why not just build bunkers in strategic spots around the country in which to safely deposit a terrorist nuclear device? I know its strange, but could it work?
2007-02-02 13:43:46 · 5 answers · asked by MaybePOTUS 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
In case I wasn't clear, the bombs go IN the bunker, to be safely exploded and contained. If say, it's found in LA, it gets moved, dropped inside, and just allowed to explode.
2007-02-02 14:31:46 · update #1
Sounds like a good idea to me, but I have a feeling the terrorists won't bother to tell us where the bomb is before they detonate it.
2007-02-02 13:52:32 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Containment is a good alternative to the random explosion of nuclear devices. But, how would one know where they are and when they might explode well enough in advance to do that? Nice try but I think you better try again. Who knows? You might actually come up with a viable solution. :o)
2007-02-02 14:02:18 · answer #2 · answered by smilindave1 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
They have had bomb shelters in the past. But the area needed & the amount of food to sustain life is unreasonable to think we could save even 10% of the country. The cost would exceed anything we have attempted to date.
2007-02-02 14:00:41 · answer #3 · answered by Wolfpacker 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
They already have the means. They are called coal mines. When the U.S. performed underground nuclear tests, that's what they used. There are plenty of abandoned coal mines around the country. Coal mines are also used to store radioactive waste.
2007-02-02 16:29:58 · answer #4 · answered by gregory_dittman 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
sounds cool... drop a mail to your governor man. :)
2007-02-02 14:07:19 · answer #5 · answered by duh 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋