From the same news outlet that Oppenheimer himself subscribed to.

  • Nacarbac [any]
    ·
    1 year ago

    Thanks for the link - ugly reading.

    That particular paragraph was certainly a carefully crafted bit of weasel wording, I agree the only interpretation that makes real sense is (to repeat what you just said) that they don't wish to "lose" the weapon in the sense of wasting its kill zone so that a small military target (which means basically any military target given the blast radius) needs a larger civilian target to die with it.

    The concern clearly wasn't a dud bomb (and they believed one of the bombs would probably detonate anyway from groundwater) because those considerations aren't even mentioned and they move swiftly on.

    Very practical and cool.

    Came across an interesting article (with some interesting speculation) about why Kyoto was taken off the list.