3 ms·
> I don't see what you could accomplish this way that a nuke couldn't The nuke poisons the land, a metallic asteroid just makes a conventional mess you cleanup
by pengaru 2y ago
> I don't see what you could accomplish this way that a nuke couldn't
The nuke poisons the land, a metallic asteroid just makes a conventional mess you cleanup and rebuild under your own flag...
- tsimionescu 2y agoYou realize that both Hiroshima and Nagasaki are huge, inhabited cities, and have been without interruption, right?
- pengaru 2y agoElevated rates of leukemia and other cancers don't prevent cities from existing or even thriving...
- tsimionescu 2y agoEven if that's true, it still means that there is at best a tiny advantage to an asteroid weapon compared to a nuclear weapon - and a gigantic disadvantage in terms of energy cost of moving an asteroid from its orbit to Earth's surface, and in terms of the months or years it would take to deploy (in which time your enemy might even find a way to stop you, or at least launch all of its nuclear arsenal on you if that's not possible, MAD style).