03-16-2005, 11:50 PM
eppie,Mar 16 2005, 01:47 AM Wrote:I think we have the same situation here as in the Iraq-war.
If Hitler would have those bombs, why wouldn't he have used them?
[right][snapback]70904[/snapback][/right]
To add to what Doc said, it also takes awhile to make these bombs from what I've heard in their early developement days. Even if Hitler had one bomb or even a few and tested them, they still might not have been confident in them to go straight to using them on enemy militaries. Thgis article only talks about one test, so even if true, they may have not had or wanted to build enough bombs to test, or done enough testing, to be sure they coulod use the bombs well on enemy troops. There were only two bombs on Japan.
Someone may make the argument that while loosing a country would be more ready to use less safe weapons, but add perfectionist and safety problems (a.k.a. not bombing their own troops) and the bombs still wouldn't get used.
I may be dead, but I'm not old (source: see lavcat)
The gloves come off, I'm playing hardball. It's fourth and 15 and you're looking at a full-court press. (Frank Drebin in The Naked Gun)
Some people in forums do the next best thing to listening to themselves talk, writing and reading what they write (source, my brother)
The gloves come off, I'm playing hardball. It's fourth and 15 and you're looking at a full-court press. (Frank Drebin in The Naked Gun)
Some people in forums do the next best thing to listening to themselves talk, writing and reading what they write (source, my brother)