U.S. Planned To Blow Up Moon In 1950s

Atomic Fireball

Well-Known Member
Donator
Jul 26, 2005
6,358
4,292
678
#1
WASHINGTON (CBSDC/AP) — Would Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin even had a moon to walk on if the United States had its way in the 1950s?
During the height of the Cold War, U.S. officials debated whether to detonate a nuclear bomb on the moon in order to send a message to the Soviet Union, the Asian News International reports.
The secret project dubbed, “A Study of Lunar Research Flights” and nicknamed “Project A119,” was seriously being considered until it was scrapped because military officials were worried it would hurt the people on Earth.
The Daily Mail reports that astronomer Carl Sagan’s calculations were used regarding the dust and gas the blast would generate. The website also states that physicist Leonard Reiffel told the Associated Press in an interview in 2000 that a U.S. nuclear flash from Earth might have “intimidated” the Soviets.
The plan consisted of carrying a nuclear device some 238,000 miles to the moon on a missile that would have detonated on impact.
The Air Force declined comment to the AP on the report.
http://washington.cbslocal.com/2012...g-up-moon-with-nuke-during-cold-war-in-1950s/



Hoo hoo they're rippin' me off Fesssss.
 

Norm Stansfield

私は亀が好きだ。
Mar 17, 2009
15,949
4,075
328
#4
I wonder what would have happened to the tides and shit.
Nothing, because a nuclear weapon wouldn't blow up the Moon. Besides, if it did, the last thing we would need to worry about is tides, because there would be pieces of the Moon colliding with the Earth, and all life would be wiped out immediately.
 

stellarcomics

Registered User
Jul 25, 2005
6,947
1,575
658
#5
Nothing, because a nuclear weapon wouldn't blow up the Moon. Besides, if it did, the last thing we would need to worry about is tides, because there would be pieces of the Moon colliding with the Earth, and all life would be wiped out immediately.
Agreed. The next life-forms would possibly use OUR carcasses as fossil fuel in the next 10,000,000 years. I really hope this is a hoax; otherwise I can't imagine a worse possibility.
 

Norm Stansfield

私は亀が好きだ。
Mar 17, 2009
15,949
4,075
328
#6
Agreed. The next life-forms would possibly use OUR carcasses as fossil fuel in the next 10,000,000 years. I really hope this is a hoax; otherwise I can't imagine a worse possibility.
It's not a possibility though, because a nuclear blast wouldn't blow up the Moon. There have been other nuclear detonations in space, closer to Earth than the Moon.

So a blast on the Moon would've done very little to affect us.
 

Party Rooster

Unleash The Beast
Apr 27, 2005
40,284
7,454
438
The Inland Empire State
#8
I doubt you'd be able to see the flash without a telescope.

Edit: I wonder if you hit the dark side of a crescent moon if it might...
 

OilyJillFart

Well-Lubed Member
Sep 26, 2008
2,877
1,141
433
#10
If there is any credibility to the story, the only possible explanation I can think of is the plan was to contaminate the surface of the moon so the russians wouldn't try to land there.
Maybe it really was one of the contingencies being talked about, but I doubt anyone was serious..
 

DJ Evel Ed

MayYourCumCrustedCocksBeConstantlyCoveredInCunt
Nov 30, 2003
2,601
75
613
Up your ass!
#11
Oh great now the terrorists have another target.
 

Atomic Fireball

Well-Known Member
Donator
Jul 26, 2005
6,358
4,292
678
#12
Nothing, because a nuclear weapon wouldn't blow up the Moon. Besides, if it did, the last thing we would need to worry about is tides, because there would be pieces of the Moon colliding with the Earth, and all life would be wiped out immediately.
As OP I couldn't resist repeating CBS-DC's absurd "Blow Up The Moon" headline. Their copy doesn't even support it.
 
Dec 12, 2007
25,849
11,487
438
#13
In the 1950s there was a plan to send all the blacks to the moon. Operation "problem solved".
 

mills

I'll give em a state, a state of unconsciousness
Jan 30, 2005
13,849
638
628
Flea Bottom
#14
The next life-forms would possibly use OUR carcasses as fossil fuel in the next 10,000,000 years.
I thought the size of the deposits was mainly due to the sheer volume of organic material left over by brontosauruses and shit. We might be a little too small.

Then again there is erock...
 

OilyJillFart

Well-Lubed Member
Sep 26, 2008
2,877
1,141
433
#15
I thought the size of the deposits was mainly due to the sheer volume of organic material left over by brontosauruses and shit. We might be a little too small.

Then again there is erock...
Oil deposits aren't a result of land animals, they were small ocean life like plankton.
 

MayrMeninoCrash

Liberal Psycopath
Dec 9, 2004
24,554
8,726
693
Loveland, CO
#17
The moon has been hit by asteroids containing the kinetic energy of a million nuclear warheads. I'm thinking it would be fine

If there is any credibility to the story, the only possible explanation I can think of is the plan was to contaminate the surface of the moon so the russians wouldn't try to land there.
Maybe it really was one of the contingencies being talked about, but I doubt anyone was serious..
The moon is subject to more unshielded solar radiation every day than any nuke could hope to generate.
 

lajikal

Registered User
Aug 6, 2009
16,155
3,896
373
#18
The moon has been hit by asteroids containing the kinetic energy of a million nuclear warheads. I'm thinking it would be fine



The moon is subject to more unshielded solar radiation every day than any nuke could hope to generate.
Also imagine aliens ROFLing after we did it too.
 

NuttyJim

Registered User
Feb 18, 2006
14,064
6,383
638
#19
Oh, it's no world for an old man any longer. What sort of a world is it at all? Men on the moon, and men spinning around the earth, and there's not no attention paid to earthly law and order no more.
 

Mags

LDAR, bitch.
Donator
Oct 22, 2004
35,487
12,214
693
Ill Repute
#21
I'm sure all would've been fine. Everything this country thinks up is a great idea.
 

Atomic Fireball

Well-Known Member
Donator
Jul 26, 2005
6,358
4,292
678
#24
I thought that was a really good movie given the miniscule budget. The only thing that sperled it for me were the reflexive leftwing tropes - Sarah Palin bad, USA bad. And the miscegenation.
 

d0uche_n0zzle

**Negative_Creep**
Sep 15, 2004
46,798
6,920
763
F.U.B.A.R
#25
I thought that was a really good movie given the miniscule budget. The only thing that sperled it for me were the reflexive leftwing tropes - Sarah Palin bad, USA bad. And the miscegenation.

Excellent point. I try and block that crap out, or else it'll drive you sane.