Re: Dirt pile

Message posted by JB737 on June 18, 2007 at 16:18:51 PST:

> Tom also said that the only reason to have anything > underground is to protect from an atomic blast.

Let's assume his above premise is 100% correct, which I doubt. Then if there had never been a nuclear threat against us, his premise argues against the need for underground bases.

But wait....there HAS BEEN such a threat pretty much continuously, and it is arguably growing again, so I would say that his premise shows the need for underground bases already, and perhaps more of them.

Where to protect, to what level of effectiveness, and at what cost, are debatable. Even if something isn't needed, or very effective, or a great value, it doesn't mean that it has not or will not be built.

Under the sea floor (or on it, then covered) is less detectable, and far more effectively defended. Transportation to support it would require a bit more imagination than the JANET terminal, but along the same lines.


In Reply to: Re: Dirt pile posted by Archangel on June 18, 2007 at 14:56:27 PST:


[ Discussion Forum Index ] [ FAQ ]