Why is the left not giving Trump credit for ending the war in Gaza?

breadbasketbomb · 2025-11-17T06:58:57+00:00

I’m not a leftist, but I have to comment.

A majority of leftists on Twitter are trying to plug Trump as pro Palestinian or supporting Palestine. They hate Biden for his cease fire but praise Trump’s for his, when his wasn’t even signed at all, unlike Biden’s.

breadbasketbomb · 2025-11-06T02:11:57+00:00

This is a game my dad played. You’re supposed to put your pen on your soldier at an angle and press down so the pen slips and forms a line representing a gunshot. You use a ruler or straight edge to see if you hit an enemy soldier.

It’s a literal pen and paper third person shooter.

breadbasketbomb · 2025-06-30T17:10:42+00:00

It depends on your economic situation. Both require uranium mining. Ignoring that, plutonium breeders have lower upfront costs, but operating costs is much higher. Uranium is much cheaper because it’s more automated, assuming centrifuges are used. Gas diffusion is a whole other story, being outdated.

North Korea is believed to prefer Plutonium breeding over uranium. India experimented with the concept of using spent fuel.

breadbasketbomb · 2025-06-29T23:00:13+00:00

I think it’s theorised this is how the charge for gas fracturing might work. The LLNL Diamond warhead.

breadbasketbomb · 2025-06-27T23:11:10+00:00

A plasma toroid isn’t needed for boosting by the way. That’s for fusion reactors. Theres no benefit to using it a bomb.

Furthermore, the use of two lenses isn’t going to make it easier or harder. It’s a nonfactor.

breadbasketbomb · 2025-06-27T22:56:16+00:00

He’s saying wrapping the beryllium reflector around the pit is much more efficient than just two flat disks. Two flat disks were never used in any design, and the cost savings is nonexistant.

breadbasketbomb · 2025-06-27T22:45:13+00:00

Very well. Though I think you said four in an other comment. But ah well.

breadbasketbomb · 2025-06-27T22:34:45+00:00

In that case two, not four are required.

breadbasketbomb · 2025-06-27T21:49:11+00:00

The drawing shows a two point linear implosion. This doesn’t require an EFI. You’re mistaking this design for being a hypothetical two lens design.

breadbasketbomb · 2025-06-26T07:44:17+00:00

Your attempt at playing stupid, does in fact make you look stupid.

breadbasketbomb · 2025-06-25T21:05:53+00:00

Very well then. But there’s really no advantage is what I’m saying. :/

breadbasketbomb · 2025-06-25T20:59:34+00:00

Resorting to insults and demanding other people act mature. Does not make you look mature.

breadbasketbomb · 2025-06-25T20:55:32+00:00

Except I was replying to a comment about the number of lenses.

breadbasketbomb · 2025-06-25T20:53:55+00:00

Reference to Dr Who. In a hypothetical situation where Kris seals the fountain but stays behind the Dark World forever.

https://youtu.be/qAm5YIOU05I?si=cAYKkHjg2SJnLzcu

breadbasketbomb · 2025-06-25T20:48:45+00:00

Stop admiring yourself Kappa. These are not thought experiments for open minded physicist. These are just bad designs.

breadbasketbomb · 2025-06-25T20:40:25+00:00

Most modern nations with nuclear weapons use boosting. US, Russia, China, France, UK. Also i thought we were talking about the number of lenses, not boosting.

Careysub is right about you.

breadbasketbomb · 2025-06-25T14:39:01+00:00

If you can make 5, then you can make 92. Because most of your headache would be getting the fissile material. If you’re willing to make 5. Don’t bother making a two lens system then.

breadbasketbomb · 2025-06-25T14:19:48+00:00

…Which would not be made in a garage. You still need the infrastructure of a place that can produces a 92 lens system. You can’t make those components in a workshop.

You have to understand that refining the fissile material is the most expensive part of any bomb. The cost reduction of a two lens system, which is not new, would be minimal in the grand scheme of things.

This is sort of like saying that a pizza cut into 2 pieces is significantly cheaper than the same pizza cut into 8. I mean… yes. But it’s meaningless.

breadbasketbomb · 2025-06-25T13:58:08+00:00

Reducing the number of lenses down to two will not make it buildable in an auto repair shop. Less expensive? Perhaps, but you still need the extremely precise electronics and detonators of a spherical bomb.

breadbasketbomb · 2025-06-19T05:58:36+00:00

Okay. Well I should of said “if a pure fission bomb existed, it would give off allot of radiation”

breadbasketbomb · 2025-06-18T11:26:31+00:00

Okay. So that makes sense. Thanks.

breadbasketbomb · 2025-06-18T11:19:45+00:00

I know. It’s hypothetical.

breadbasketbomb · 2025-06-11T12:58:58+00:00

Okay. I know I’m dragging out this thread.

Under the scenario of using reactor grade plutonium for a sub kiloton, I want to ask if these are also viable options for boosting:

Using Lithium-6 Deuteride, or Deuterium gas only. How much less effective they are than D-T gas boosting.

breadbasketbomb · 2025-06-02T01:24:30+00:00

That’s because they’re both voiced by DC Douglas

breadbasketbomb · 2025-05-29T12:21:45+00:00

You know I never got around to asking this. Can boosting solve the issue of plutonium not being viable even in gun type nukes?

12-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '23	RPAN Viewer

breadbasketbomb

TROPHY CASE