The effects of a Bunker Buster (short video).

The effects of a Bunker Buster (short video).


Recently there has been a lot of talk about the so-called “bunker buster,” a nuclear bomb designed especially for the destruction of targets well below the surface, a team of scientists cooperated to make the following animation about the effectiveness (or rather ineffectiveness) and consequences of the use of a so-called “bunker buster.” They don’ t focus on the political consequences (which will be severe), but rather focus on technical details. Make sure to watch it and listen carefully to the audio comment. I assure you, it’s worth your time and lasts only a few minutes.

You can watch it by clicking here


Return to Main Page


Comment gfolandiya soset

Fri Sep 22, 2006 8:20 am MST by phentermine

Comment Nice site !

Mon Sep 4, 2006 7:53 pm MST by Helga

Comment fff

Sat Aug 19, 2006 2:08 pm MST by f

Comment pvlxm uwmzvqk gjmrzketb ltdyoupi uawlmgct bvzcw tfolgji

Tue Aug 8, 2006 10:49 pm MST by dvefqpcat vjtp

Comment Hysterical? This is major league bad news. We're talking about potential mega-death. Nice to see your sensitive side ZIo. : - (

Thu May 11, 2006 4:39 am MST by Muhammed

Comment O please stop being hysterical. These are LOW yield tactical nukes.

Fri May 5, 2006 7:08 pm MST by ZIo

Comment Pat, I agree, let's wait and see, the so-called deadlines and "point of no returns" which are given by the pro-war movement are not very credible, one might even say that they are completely arbitrary, I don't know if some of youn remember how March was supposedly going to be "the point of no return?" Well, last time I checked it's April now and since the international community fialed to respond to the fear mongering, they have made June the NEW point of return (how is it possible to postpone a "point of no return?)...and if the international community doesn't buy the fear mongering this time I guess December will be the new point of no return...and so on...and so on. Catch my drift? The point of no return is years ahead and the doom scenarios come from those who are biased to the bone.

Sat Apr 15, 2006 7:15 am MST by Bart

Comment Top analysts have estimated that the time needed for the completion of a nuclear bomb (even the smaller ones) is ten years. The question remains: Is confronting Iran NOW better than the threat of a nuclear armed Iran in ten years or so? Peronally I doubt whether the current regime willl survive the ten years needed to complete a nuclear bomb, Lots can change in ten yaers, and if the nuclear ficlities/bombs fall into the hands of reformist Iranians such as Reza Shah Jr., that's fine with me. I say: let's wait and don't rush things.

Fri Apr 14, 2006 2:41 pm MST by Pat

Comment Excellent one, thanks. For years we were bombarded with the thought that rogue states, communist states, or terrorist groups were going to use the nuke and that the LAST nation in the world to even bring up the nuclear option would be the US, how ironic that the US is now the frst to break the taboo,

Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:29 pm MST by @mos @wall

Add Comment

On This Site

  • About this site
  • Main Page
  • Most Recent Comments
  • Complete Article List
  • Sponsors

Search This Site

Syndicate this blog site

Powered by BlogEasy

Free Blog Hosting