I used to think that marshall islands were heaven on earth untill I heared that they were subjected to nuclear tests. How could any one do this to those masterpieces?
2007-09-07 12:23:55 · 9 answers · asked by ☆Dana☆ 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
I live in Southern Nevada. We had a bunch of above-ground and below-ground nuclear explosions over the years. We even have an Atomic Test Museum east of the Strip.But, one answerer got it right. Some of the hydrogen bombs tested in atmospheric tests were simply too large to test at the Nevada Site.
But, we have not tested a nuclear weapon in many years. Still, the French did so in French Polynesia a few years ago. Funny one that. Didn't hear one bit of protest from the "usual suspects" who gathered at the cattle crossing at the Nevada Site to protest our testing. And France cracked an atoll in half with their test.
2007-09-07 13:49:15 · answer #1 · answered by desertviking_00 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
They did most of the nuclear testing there because it was remote, had few people to relocate and posed the least amount of hazard to humans during the testing.
The world's first H-Bomb was detonated on Eniwetak atoll. There hasn't been any nuclear detonations there in many decades. I was on the island of Eniwetok for almost two weeks in February of 1969.
And you're right. It was a paradise! The water in the lagoon was crystal clear and you could see these coral "heads" underwater, they were as big as a house! Balmy breezes, moderate temperature and seemed to rain a little bit every morning. After being there for those two weeks, snorkeling, deep sea fishing (I caught a 24 pound Wahoo!!!), rafting to some of the other islands I can understand why some people dream of a "little grass shack".
All but a few of the islands are habitable now, radiation levels well within safe levels. Only one caveat; you can't eat the shell fish (snail, crab or mollusks) their shells pick up and store minute amounts of residual radioactive material which still poses a hazard to humans. Otherwise any edible fish can be eaten.
I loved that tiny little island (3 miles long and 800 yards wide at it's widest point) and would like to see it again someday.
2007-09-07 14:16:11 · answer #2 · answered by Albannach 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The testing on the Marshall Islands was done because of its relative isolation and few inhabitants surrounding it. But I could think of better places to do this testing. Oh, Nevada already had it done! New Mexico, nope, done too! Three Mile Island, oops, tested there too. North Korea, again done there too! Russia, there as well. China? Any country where there is nuclear weapons have all tested them somewhere or another. Wait till Iran starts to play!
2007-09-07 12:37:33 · answer #3 · answered by spike 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Manhattan island was a little too crowded.
But, seriously, the same reason as Bikini Atol - the middle of the South Pacific was about as remote as you can get.
2007-09-07 12:30:44 · answer #4 · answered by B.Kevorkian 7 · 7⤊ 0⤋
as far as i know they were chosen because the nukes tested there were too big to be tested in nevada. so they chose islands under american protectorate, distant from any other land, easy to evacuate bla, bla.
2007-09-07 13:37:01 · answer #5 · answered by ionut s 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
because we only had to move a few people in an otherwise completely uninhabited area.
2007-09-07 12:34:24 · answer #6 · answered by Lavrenti Beria 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
where else could they do it? If they do it on any mainland then they risk it contaminating the water supply of nearby areas.
2007-09-07 12:31:48 · answer #7 · answered by Cowboy87 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
dunno where ya got your info on marshall islands,just a cpl piles of sand in the water isn't anything significant.place was so desolate lizards didn't even want to live there
2007-09-07 14:16:14 · answer #8 · answered by yankeegray_99 5 · 0⤊ 4⤋
we hated them for their freedom
2007-09-07 12:32:29 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋