Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Militarized Dolphins Protect Almost a Quarter of the US Nuclear Stockpile

military.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 231 posts

Re: Militarized Dolphins Protect Almost a Quarter of the US Nuclear Stockpile

#151

Post by JohnBooty »

mbg721 wrote: post #113
JohnBooty wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> irreversibly poisoned Is this the case? While nuclear weapons are, obviously, beyond horrific… I’m not sure that the radioactive fallout is a permanent problem. As a rule of thumb, the more intense the radiation, the shorter the half-life. In the cases of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, only a small portion of the deaths were due to radiation poisoning, and the cities were thriving on their former sites within decades. (I…

The bombs used on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were also very rudimentary compared to a modern nuclear arsenal.

Correct. But - modern bombs are more powerful, but is there greater residual radioactivity?

Re: Militarized Dolphins Protect Almost a Quarter of the US Nuclear Stockpile

#153

Post by antris »

Emma_Goldman wrote: post #143
antris wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't talk about casus belli, you're just making stuff up. Sure, things happen all the time without a war breaking out. But it's not like you can "just kill" or "just attack" without repercussions. That's ridiculous thought. It's similar to saying "what's the reason to have a security guard in the shop, when you can just take a pistol and kill him". Security isn't about having an impenetrable defense; such a thing…

The phrase 'an act of war' means an act which intends to and/or actually does give the target casus belli. I took it for granted that you knew that. See, for example, the OED reference: 'An act by one nation intended to initiate or provoke a war with another nation; an act considered sufficient cause for war.' https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20...

Well, war has changed. Russia annexed part of Ukraine without ever declaring war. It's not as black and white today. War is a spectrum, especially at the borders of superpowers. Whether you want to call it an act of war or an escalation or whatever, I don't care. If you want to play definition semantics, I'm not interested as it completely misses the point I was making.

Re: Militarized Dolphins Protect Almost a Quarter of the US Nuclear Stockpile

#154

Post by kerneloftruth »

formvoltron wrote: post #145
chipsa wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Second strike weapon. It is supposed to be able to survive someone else's first strike. First strike weapons can't survive someone else's first strike. It's part of the whole "assured destruction" thing: doesn't matter if you hit us first, you're still going to end up a self lit parking lot afterwards.

The obvious problem with mutual assured destruction is that an insane person could get ahold of the weapons, launch first, and kill all of current and future humanity. How about not strike back, just try to survive & show future generations of the world how to be. Go live in that other country that isn't radioactive.

"How about not strike back, just try to survive & show future generations of the world how to be. Go live in that other country that isn't radioactive."

The word for that is "surrender".

Re: Militarized Dolphins Protect Almost a Quarter of the US Nuclear Stockpile

#155

Post by thizzbuzz »

loeg wrote: post #142
maccard wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> rather spend their mindshare improving the animal condition than the human condition. How does arming dolphins improve the human condition?

Someone could make a compelling argument that US' global military dominance imposes a kind of Pax Americana that is net beneficial to the human condition, and this is one limb of that military dominance.

No post body was provided.

Re: Militarized Dolphins Protect Almost a Quarter of the US Nuclear Stockpile

#157

Post by InitialLastName »

antris wrote: post #68
pelasaco wrote: post #53

"For protection against enemy divers, dolphins will swim up to the infiltrator, bump into them and place a buoy device on their back or a limb using their mouth. The buoy then drags the outed diver to the surface for easy capture." I mean come on, "enemy divers" will just kill the dolphins or avoid contact with them..

Do you understand the context? These dolphins are protecting an area claimed by the military. Killing the dolphin would be an act of war. Even doing the same to non-live military equipment would be. Obviously during wartime the dolphins would be vulnerable. But during peace time you'd think twice before attacking a military dolphin. You don't "just kill" them if you're not in war.

If you are a military diver covertly infiltrating a foreign country's military installation and you get discovered by an agent of that country (be it human, animal or artificial), you are already quickly approaching (if not across the line into) "act of war" territory.

Granted, modern international relations has done a solid job of fuzzing the delineation of "acts of war" such that interpretations of acts can serve needs in a geopolitical context, but that will be the case whether you kill the dolphin or not.

Re: Militarized Dolphins Protect Almost a Quarter of the US Nuclear Stockpile

#158

Post by whatshisface »

formvoltron wrote: post #145
chipsa wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Second strike weapon. It is supposed to be able to survive someone else's first strike. First strike weapons can't survive someone else's first strike. It's part of the whole "assured destruction" thing: doesn't matter if you hit us first, you're still going to end up a self lit parking lot afterwards.

The obvious problem with mutual assured destruction is that an insane person could get ahold of the weapons, launch first, and kill all of current and future humanity. How about not strike back, just try to survive & show future generations of the world how to be. Go live in that other country that isn't radioactive.

Because then a sane person could get ahold of the weapons, launch first, and kill all current opponents.

Re: Militarized Dolphins Protect Almost a Quarter of the US Nuclear Stockpile

#159

Post by hugh-avherald »

Nullinker wrote: post #127
celticninja wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are overestimating how well a diver can maenouver under water in comparison to a dolphin.

But we should also not underestimate the ability of the enemy to train dolphins. It would be hard to send an strike team of just dolphins but I imagine a strike team of both humans and dolphins trained to fend of the defending dolphins and protect the divers would stand a chance.

How does the enemy get the trained dolphins there? And once discovered, an attack, dolphins or not, isn't going to have much success.

Re: Militarized Dolphins Protect Almost a Quarter of the US Nuclear Stockpile

#160

Post by belter »

thelittleone wrote: post #62
poulsbohemian wrote: post #19

This isn't exactly a secret or new information... it was pretty well known when I lived on the peninsula 10+ years ago (thus the username, Poulsbohemian...). There's a state park right near the Hood Canal bridge where it isn't uncommon to watch the submarines come and go in and out of the canal. Always a bit surreal to push your kids on the swings while watching a first strike weapon capable of destroying the world p…

No doubt surreal, but a single sub destroy the world? That piqued my interest so took a quick look and found an article [1]. This article states that "even a single vessel [submarine] could reduce as many as 288 city-sized targets into radioactive ash in less than 30 minutes." Later in the article they say that the Ohio class is capable of carrying up to 24 UGM-133 Trident II D5 submarine launched ballistic missiles.…

"...The planet has been through a lot worse than us. Been through earthquakes, volcanoes, plate tectonics, continental drift, solar flares, sun spots, magnetic storms, the magnetic reversal of the poles … hundreds of thousands of years of bombardment by comets and asteroids and meteors, worldwide floods, tidal waves, worldwide fires, erosion, cosmic rays, recurring ice ages … And we think some plastic bags and some aluminum cans are going to make a difference? The planet isn’t going anywhere. WE are!..."

   George Carlin
Post reply on HN