Military Review

Nuclear death sleeps at the bottom of the oceans

44
Nuclear death sleeps at the bottom of the oceans



Nothing worse than the atomic bomb humanity for all its history not invented. The accumulated nuclear charges are enough to destroy the planet several dozen times, although one is enough. Every atomic bomb is guarded, so that God forbid something does not happen. Not an explosion, just a release of radioactive stuffing threatens a terrible environmental catastrophe. And while few people think about the danger that threatens humanity from the bottom of the oceans.

Ocean dump humanity

What do you think can be found at the bottom of the oceans and seas? Exotic underwater plants, previously unknown to science species of living organisms? Of course. And also cans, glass bottles and a lot of other attributes of human civilization, thrown by it into the ocean as a garbage can.
However, in addition to household garbage, “surprises” are stored on the bottom, which represent a direct threat to both humanity and the planet as a whole. It is about the "atomic gifts" of our civilization, resting on the bottom of the ocean. Like time bombs, they lie under many kilometers of water and wait in the wings.

Dead submarines

10 April 1963, the American submarine "Tracher" went to the beyond depth and was crushed by hydrostatic pressure. 129 man crew remained at the bottom. The boat did not carry nuclear weapons, but the atomic reactor still rests at 2,5-kilometer depth.

21 May 1968 for the last time contacted the submarine "Scorpion". In October, a submarine lying on the 3-kilometer depth was discovered using a deep-sea apparatus. Nuclear reactor and two torpedoes with nuclear warheads and lie on the bottom of the Atlantic.

In 1970, the Soviet submarine K-8 was killed in the Bay of Biscay. Whether the nuclear weapon was on it is unknown, and two nuclear reactors - yes. October 6 1968 in the Atlantic went to the bottom of the Soviet K-219 with 14 nuclear missiles and two nuclear reactors. 7 April in the Norwegian Sea, the Soviet K-278 ("Komsomolets") died.



In 2003, the Russian K-159 towed for recycling sank in the Barents Sea. In 2014, it was examined by Russian and Norwegian scientists. The level of radiation around the boat in the normal range. Experts say that 20 years can not worry, but two decades later, yes, they will pass, and then what?

Aviation also contributed to the clogging of the oceans.

Gifts from the sky

13 February 1950 of the year (don't believe in the 13 number after that) next to Alaska, in Texas, the B-36 engine caught fire. The crew dropped an atomic bomb, and then jumped himself on parachutes. In March, 1956, the B-47 with two atomic bombs disappeared over the Mediterranean. In 1968, the Americans lost 4 atomic bombs off the coast of Greenland, found and raised only 3.



In 1958, the US B-57 off the coast of Georgia collided with a fighter. To reach the airfield, the crew got rid of the “ballast” - the atomic bomb “Mark 15”, 100 times more powerful than the one dropped on Hiroshima. Lost "Mark" for 10 weeks searched, but could not find, it still lies there, literally 10 km from the coast.

It is claimed that the Americans officially recognized the loss of 11 nuclear bombs! But how much they really lost, nobody knows. After all, even the recognized ones are the result of the noise raised by newspapermen and witnesses when it was simply impossible not to admit what had happened.

Did the Soviet side have any losses? Surely they were, but even less is known about these cases. The problem of overly curious journalists in the USSR was able to solve quickly and effectively.

Man is his own gravedigger

All these “burials” were the results of accidents, often accompanied by human victims, but what to say about cases when a person without any particular reason, due to laziness or thoughtlessness, deliberately lowered atomic “time-keeping mines” to the bottom?

In the 1968, an accident occurred on the K-27 submarine, as a result of which the boat was literally “saturated” with radiation. For more than 10 years the military puzzled over what to do with a “dirty” boat. In 1981, the problem was solved simply and simply: K-27 was brought into the Kara Sea and flooded.

And I must say, it was not at all know-how. For several decades the USSR had buried spent nuclear reactors of nuclear submarines and nuclear-powered icebreakers in the cold northern waters. And it was considered normal things.

And now about the main thing

During the 20th century, people with blunt obstinacy turned the World Ocean into a nuclear burial ground. If specialists are constantly observing the earth’s dumping of nuclear waste in order to rule out the appearance of a second Chernobyl, then there is no surveillance of the marine repositories.

Bombs can not explode. But for decades, the hull of bombs and recessed nuclear reactors gradually destroys corrosion, sooner or later their deadly stuffing will fall into the environment. Water, algae, fish and animals living in the ocean will be infected.

Yes, water takes 70% of the earth's surface, it would seem that our planet has several hundred poisoned square kilometers! Yes, if the accident happens in the Arctic Ocean, it will affect a minimum of people. But many "gifts" lie within a few kilometers. from the densely populated coasts of Europe and America, where fishing boats and cruise ships are more than fish in the sea. In this case, the consequences of emergency will be catastrophic.

And the last. Unattended atomic bombs are constantly attracting the attention of international terrorists. It is difficult to steal a nuclear bomb from a protected base. And here lies itself, take it - I do not want. Experts say it is incredibly difficult to get a lost bomb from the ocean floor. Huge amounts and special equipment are needed. It is beyond the power of many states, and even terrorists persecuted by the international community are even more so. However, in recent years, terrorists suddenly got rich. And if you have money, then all other problems are solved.
Author:
Originator:
http://esoreiter.ru/index.php?id=1215/08-12-2015-092016.html&dat=news&list=12.2015
44 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. corporal
    corporal 12 December 2015 06: 57
    +1
    Thank you for the article. I was also interested in the question of the further finding of nuclear "products" on the ocean floor, but nowhere this topic was raised.
    ================================================== ==============
    Well, to argue what to do next- request
    Either "bahnets" or will be raised. Surely, specialized specialists have developed some kind of action plan long ago.
    1. alicante11
      alicante11 12 December 2015 09: 41
      15
      Or simply radiation will dissipate in the world Ocean, without significantly affecting the radiation background. I don’t think that the Soviet atomic scientists were dumber than us and did not calculate the consequences of the flooding of the reactors.
      1. Mik13
        Mik13 12 December 2015 14: 55
        +1
        Quote: alicante11
        Or simply radiation will dissipate in the world Ocean, without significantly affecting the radiation background. I don’t think that the Soviet atomic scientists were dumber than us and did not calculate the consequences of the flooding of the reactors.

        Yeah. Fukushima alone was more crap.
        1. Riv
          Riv 12 December 2015 23: 23
          +8
          The author exaggerates the danger. The fish that was born and grew next to the sunken nuclear submarine is not worth it, but the extinct reactor does not pose a serious danger. The fuel in it is in the form of tablets, which are practically insoluble in water. The formation of a critical mass during corrosion of fuel elements is excluded. Even if the spilled fuel starts to warm up, it will simply be scattered with boiled water. Slow leaching, which will slightly increase the local background, will go.

          For a lost bomb, everything is more unpleasant. Metallic uranium and plutonium are chemically quite active. Corrosion will begin in sea water and the biosphere in a sufficiently large radius will be infected with nuclides that will go further along the food chains. However, the mass of uranium in the bomb is not large. The background will be raised in a fairly large radius, but after a few years it will return to normal. Actually, due to corrosion, there is no point in getting a warhead lying there for several years from the bottom. She is safe.

          The worst thing is the accident of a nuclear power plant. The fuel in them is an order of magnitude greater than in the submarine reactor. If water enters the fuel rod, an intense leaching reaction occurs. In this case, the fuel cannot fly away and the water becomes more and more polluted. Further it will fall into the soil, or into the ocean, then the nuclides will begin to accumulate in living organisms. And since the level of pollution is initially very high, the Japanese Fukushima will remember their time more than once or twice.
      2. kalibr
        kalibr 12 December 2015 16: 31
        +1
        Do you think nuclear scientists decided? When did our officials listen to scientists? Only when their opinions coincided ...
      3. tilovaykrisa
        tilovaykrisa 13 December 2015 17: 38
        +1
        Bombs are still half the trouble, but what scientists thought when hundreds, if not thousands of tons of chemical weapons were drowned in the Baltic after wows, one mustard gas is enough to make the Baltic dead.
  2. Good cat
    Good cat 12 December 2015 07: 16
    +8
    I don’t think there is any kind of action plan, and the terrorists will not get the same bombs from under the water, no matter how rich they are. There were a lot of such articles, but what's the point?
    1. Mik13
      Mik13 12 December 2015 14: 58
      +3
      Quote: Good cat
      I don’t think there is any kind of action plan, and the terrorists will not get the same bombs from under the water, no matter how rich they are. There were a lot of such articles, but what's the point?

      The bomb product is very delicate. Even if they get it, they will not explode.
      The product requires a certain temperature, timely service ... This is not a bottom mine of the times of the WWII.
  3. Jozhkin Cat
    Jozhkin Cat 12 December 2015 07: 17
    +6
    Kaak, kaaak, you can lose 11 nuclear bombs damn ??
    1. Ykrofashist
      Ykrofashist 12 December 2015 23: 11
      0
      And here is SOAK, THAT IS SO. Both sides do not care about what will happen later. (Wehrmacht chemical weapons are also in the Atlantic or at the bottom of the Arctic). I saw sailors on TV who said they were allowed to drown at depths of more than a hundred meters. So you can meet chemical gifts as early as 103-105 meters from the roller of heights and depths laughing crying crying crying
  4. NeRTT
    NeRTT 12 December 2015 07: 22
    0
    This is not enough for terrorists !! And so inhuman sacrifices from people become obsolete, jackals of shaitan !! am
  5. Hitrovan07
    Hitrovan07 12 December 2015 07: 30
    +1
    It’s good that for now THIS is simply lost - otherwise the articles have already gone on APPLICATION of what has not been lost yet - people are going crazy.
  6. Megatron
    Megatron 12 December 2015 07: 30
    10
    About terrorists - bullshit of course, but what everyone dumped is very bad.
  7. Amurets
    Amurets 12 December 2015 08: 02
    +1
    Quote: Good cat
    Surely, specialized specialists have long developed an action plan.

    Read how the Americans raised our K-1975 near Hawaii in 129. Ref: 38 osnaz-Kaptsov brigade. About AZORIAN Project. This is where the ship is and how to raise nuclear waste using such ships can be thought up.
    1. tolancop
      tolancop 12 December 2015 10: 46
      +4
      If "you can think of", then come up with !!!
      Much has been written about the uplift, including, I suppose, fables.
      But suppose they raised atomic trash. And then what to do with it? For land burial, it still needs to be delivered to land. Will it not be necessary to bury ship-lifting and transport equipment next to this operation?
      1. Amurets
        Amurets 12 December 2015 11: 09
        0
        The fact that the Glomar company was engaged in the extraction of iron ore nodules is well established. There shouldn’t be any problems with the rise, but there is something to think about with nuclear safety.
  8. sa-ag
    sa-ag 12 December 2015 10: 27
    +4
    And in the Baltic, how many chemical weapons have been flooded since the war
  9. Waltasar
    Waltasar 12 December 2015 10: 29
    +2
    Or you can just dig it up. In the north of the Perm region there are concreted mines. According to rumors are not empty. And next to the lake from the tests. In the neighboring lakes of fish ... This summer, a friend went there could not get enough :)
    1. tolancop
      tolancop 12 December 2015 10: 54
      +2
      It seems that in Kazakhstan there is a lake specially made by a nuclear explosion (testing the possibility of using nuclear devices for civil engineering purposes).
      My army platoon commander (80s) said that he swam in it. Says: "Nothing, but then the hair got out of my head ...". And indeed, he had obvious problems with his hair.
      1. Bashibuzuk
        Bashibuzuk 12 December 2015 11: 43
        13
        Duc ... Komvzvoda is 25 years - the maximum.
        And they begin to bald, someone, of course, but by thirty bald patches are normally designated.
        My uncle generally bald at 23, and bathed in the Syr Darya, clear mountain water.
        Anyway, it is believed that bald head is an excess of testosterone, when the women are pulled by horror like.
        Mosht, women are radioactive? Or just active?
        ...
        Radiation is terrible in supercritical parameters. Like in Chernobyl.
        And the normal background for us, what Martians might be deadly at all.
        Cockroaches see radiation - and nothing, do not roll up their paws.
        And now in Chernobyl expanse, the most important radio activist disappeared - a man, and the animals went to breed. In the wild.
      2. Mik13
        Mik13 12 December 2015 15: 12
        +3
        Quote: tolancop
        It seems that in Kazakhstan there is a lake specially made by a nuclear explosion (testing the possibility of using nuclear devices for civil engineering purposes).
        My army platoon commander (80s) said that he swam in it. Says: "Nothing, but then the hair got out of my head ...". And indeed, he had obvious problems with his hair.


        If he got hair from the "dose" - he would die.

        PS - Yes, he clarified -
        After exposure to a dose of 3-4 Gy, hair begins to thin and fall out over 1-3 weeks. Then hair growth can resume. However, when irradiated with a dose of the order of 7 Gy, complete hair loss occurs.

        For reference - one Gy is approximately 1 Sound.

        So he’s definitely not bald from radiation.
        1. Riv
          Riv 12 December 2015 23: 08
          0
          Catching a whole sievert, and even one-time, when swimming - bald perhaps that you will not have time ...
    2. trantor
      trantor 12 December 2015 16: 14
      0
      Quote: Waltasar
      According to rumors are not empty.

      Do not believe it.
      1. pensioneree
        pensioneree 20 October 2016 12: 08
        0
        There is a glorious town in Estonia, Sillamae, famous for its port, chemical metallurgy, etc. (formerly closed) _so I have an acquaintance at the "tailing dump" as a kid, he collected raspberries, like cherry plums. 2 children and does not cough, a face-face ate-khokhla on bacon, as before the moon! Why? (There at one time they did biosecurity for nuclear submarine reactors). I don't know for sure, but niobium, tantalum, titanium-saw.)
  10. Bashibuzuk
    Bashibuzuk 12 December 2015 11: 01
    10
    Wow, Ah. scary article. Everyone is afraid.
    ...
    The author does not take into account actual accidents at nuclear power plants. The real ones. With a massive spill of radioactivity.
    Threemile Island, Chernobyl, Fukushima .... the French are silent, but they certainly have their own "surprises".
    ...
    And the rusty pieces of iron lying on the bottom or in the bay of Monte Carlo are of interest to him.
    Well .... the result of the radioactive contamination of Western Europe is the dominance of "hammocks" and the rest are inadequate. Either he will stab and devour the neighbor, then they begin to dissect the lions in front of the kids.
    That bearded women sing from the stage. That porn actresses sit in parliaments, like Cicciolini.
    ...
    What about us?
    The army moved to the North, in the Arctic.
    Well, that means they will put things in order with orphaned property - thermo and simply nuclear.
    ...
    Empty article.
    1. Beasofffan
      Beasofffan 12 December 2015 11: 33
      11
      Solidarity about the "terrible" article. Yes, the loss or destruction of nuclear weapons is a danger. But is it worse than chemical weapons buried at the bottom of the Baltic Sea? More terrible than accidents at nuclear power plants? More terrible than the Bhopal disaster? Hardly. Hundreds of thousands of those killed in the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is horror. And more than half a million burned during the bombing of Dresden is not horror? Spraying defoliants and burning forests with napalm in Vietnam is also not a horror? Nuclear weapons are terrible weapons. But no worse than any other. Both in terms of application and in matters of safe storage. The article in my opinion is really about nothing.
      1. Mik13
        Mik13 12 December 2015 15: 17
        +2
        Quote: BeasOfMan
        Solidarity about the "terrible" article. Yes, the loss or destruction of nuclear weapons is a danger. But is it worse than chemical weapons buried at the bottom of the Baltic Sea? More terrible than accidents at nuclear power plants? More terrible than the Bhopal disaster? Hardly. Hundreds of thousands of those killed in the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is horror. And more than half a million burned during the bombing of Dresden is not horror? Spraying defoliants and burning forests with napalm in Vietnam is also not a horror? Nuclear weapons are terrible weapons. But no worse than any other. Both in terms of application and in matters of safe storage. The article in my opinion is really about nothing.


        By the way, a relatively simple instrument is enough to determine radiation infection.
        And in order to determine chemical infection, a complex laboratory analysis is needed, and a separate one for each substance ...
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. Aleksander
        Aleksander 12 December 2015 20: 24
        -2
        Quote: BeasOfMan
        And more half a million not burnt during the bombing of Dresden?

        belay No horror. Commission 2010gg.-25 thousand dead. Mostly under the rubble. Why this pathetics?
    2. RONIN-HS
      RONIN-HS 12 December 2015 14: 20
      +3
      Bashibuzuk - An empty article ...

      You have it from ignorance. Over time will pass. laughing

      There is one more problem, which was widely discussed in the 80s, but somehow then suspiciously "calmed down". The fact is that oceanologists have found out that at great depths in the faults there can be zones with an abnormally high concentration of heavy water. Which in turn is (or can serve) the "explosive" of the hydrogen bomb. It was suggested that if a thermonuclear charge is detonated in the APVK zone (abnormally high concentration) of heavy water, then this can cause heavy water to detonate World Ocean. Instant contraction of the "globe" and - here's a new asteroid belt in Earth's orbit. Creepy - yes! You will say that this is complete nonsense - it is quite possible.
      But what if...!? am
      1. Bongo
        Bongo 12 December 2015 15: 04
        10
        Quote: RONIN-HS
        Which in turn is (or can serve) the "explosive" of the hydrogen bomb.

        Really? No. Poor nuclear physicists fought in the 50s over the most difficult task of creating thermonuclear weapons. But it turns out that the whole business is to go down to the bottom and collect "heavy water" and pour it into the warhead. wassat It seems that some even do not know the physics school course. negative
        1. Amurets
          Amurets 12 December 2015 16: 29
          +2
          Quote: Bongo
          it turns out that the whole business is to go down to the bottom and collect "heavy water" and pour it into the warhead

          Hi! Sergey! I didn’t understand the proposal? What do they propose to use a moderator instead of nuclear fuel? Then you need to insert this inventor for the Shnobel Prize as a cadidate.
          1. Bongo
            Bongo 12 December 2015 16: 35
            +4
            Quote: Amurets
            Hi! Sergey! I didn’t understand the proposal? What do they propose to use a moderator instead of nuclear fuel? Then you need to insert this inventor for the Shnobel Prize as a cadidate.

            Hi Nikolay! This is not an offer, this is an irony wink It's strange when adults write this.
            1. Amurets
              Amurets 12 December 2015 16: 52
              +2
              Quote: Bongo
              Quote: Amurets
              Hi! Sergey! I didn’t understand the proposal? What do they propose to use a moderator instead of nuclear fuel? Then you need to insert this inventor for the Shnobel Prize as a cadidate.

              Hi Nikolay! This is not an offer, this is an irony wink It's strange when adults write this.

              I perfectly understood you, You will not offer such nonsense. I did not understand a stray samurai.
        2. kalibr
          kalibr 12 December 2015 16: 36
          +1
          Do not pour heavy water into the warhead!
          1. Bongo
            Bongo 12 December 2015 16: 38
            +5
            Quote: kalibr
            Do not pour heavy water into the warhead!

            Certainly! yes Since it is not suitable for maintaining a thermonuclear reaction. Please explain this to a respected one. RONIN-HS.
            1. Bashibuzuk
              Bashibuzuk 12 December 2015 16: 47
              +2
              Huh ...
              wanted to object. Nothing to mind, okazza.
              From ignorance - back in the 80s I knew about the loss of bombs. No one hid Palomares especially.
              And most importantly - from that time, no matter how much you went across the oceans - nifiga has not bald. And still, 56, these two bells and whistles between the legs do not give rest.
              ...
              To argue ... over there what kind of uncle got caught - and right away about vigorous physics.
              What is there to cover? Six tambourine, only.
              ...
              And in the ocean there are also such "black smokers", there, in general, hydrogen-sulfuric life was found there. It just feeds on enriched uranium-plutonium-americium.
              ...
              Only now, those suckers who drop bombs do not bother a single gram - they dropped it there or not.
              ...
              Understand ... there is nothing to understand.
  11. Snail N9
    Snail N9 12 December 2015 12: 29
    +5
    One medium-sized typhoon releases during its short existence an energy equal to 100000 nuclear bombs with a capacity of 20 kt each. This is for information.
    1. Cap.Morgan
      Cap.Morgan 12 December 2015 15: 24
      +1
      The danger is not in energy, but in radiation.
  12. Leader
    Leader 12 December 2015 12: 41
    -2
    Something is modestly silent about the atomic "losses" of the USSR / Russia ... our more Americans have lost.
  13. Bongo
    Bongo 12 December 2015 14: 20
    16
    The accumulated nuclear charges are enough to destroy the planet several dozen times, although one is enough. Each atomic bomb is guarded so that God forbid what happens. Not an explosion, just the release of a radioactive filling threatens a terrible environmental disaster.


    Anyone who writes such publications is generally not very familiar with real nuclear test statistics. So in the United States at the Nevada nuclear test site (satellite image) 928 nuclear explosions were carried out, but this did not lead to any catastrophic consequences.


    At present, the administration of the Nevada nuclear test site organizes monthly tours of the territory, the queue for which is scheduled for months ahead, the level of radiation in most of the test site differs little from background values.

    The release of the "radioactive filling" has occurred many times both in our country and in the Americans and the French, I will not speak for the Chinese, since they do not disclose such information. So at the Semipalatinsk test site over the past decade, several secret Russian-American-Kazakh joint operations have taken place during which 200 kg! plutonium (unexploded nuclear charges). But the author apparently "does not know" request

    More than 600 nuclear tests were performed at the Semipalatinsk nuclear test site, in which 125 atmospheric (26 ground, 91 airborne, 8 high-altitude), 343 underground nuclear explosions (of which 215 in adits and 128 in wells) were carried out. The total power of nuclear charges tested during the period from 1949 to 1963 at the Semipalatinsk test site was 2500 times the power of an atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima. Add here 135 nuclear explosions on Novaya Zemlya of them: 87 in the atmosphere (of which 84 air, 1 ground, 2 surface), 3 underwater and 42 underground. You can also recall the French, British and Chinese trials. All this, of course, caused some harm to the biosphere, but the planet did not collapse and life on it did not disappear, so that you should not escalate passions. Of course, nuclear weapons (like any weapon) are a means of destruction, but it is possible only because we have them, our country still exists.


    Quote: tolancop
    It seems that in Kazakhstan there is a lake specially made by a nuclear explosion (testing the possibility of using nuclear devices for civil engineering purposes).


    There really is a lake (in a satellite image), of course, this experiment at one time led to a significant contamination of the area with radionuclides, but at present the background there is also normal.
    1. kalibr
      kalibr 12 December 2015 16: 42
      0
      The fact is that microdoses of radiation, in particular radionuclides, entering the human body and especially the child are concentrated in the pituitary gland and cause a weakening of mental abilities. This was the first to be noticed in Norway, after a memorable test of the Tsar bomb. Then the pollution level in Norway increased by a factor of 4 and soon math performance declined by a factor of 4. Humanity is visibly stupid. These are the consequences of all these explosions. For many, this is not a problem, but it is a problem for civilization as a whole.
  14. Cap.Morgan
    Cap.Morgan 12 December 2015 15: 27
    0
    To get metal completely not infected with isotopes, flooded ships of the First World War era are being raised. This is where the metal is clean. Everything else has traces, to one degree or another, of radioactive contamination.
  15. tasha
    tasha 12 December 2015 15: 49
    +8
    Mankind has never come up with anything worse than an atomic bomb


    Nuclear weapons are a deterrent.

    Get into the hands of terrorists a nuclear device - a maximum of 10-15mln victims, those who were in the epicenter, if in a big city. Well then again ... That flu Spaniard contracted 500mln people, died from 50 to 100mln. Probably, it sits in test tubes, that the Spaniard will seem childish babble. Brrr
  16. partizan86
    partizan86 12 December 2015 16: 23
    +7
    It is safe. An explosion, as already mentioned, cannot be. And the shells of reactors and bombs with missiles are definitely not made of Lada, they will not rot. In addition, everything lies at a sufficient depth, it is cold there and sedimentary rocks with microorganisms have probably long ago formed a semblance of a sarcophagus.
    Oil and other chemicals have already done millions of times more harm.
    It is necessary to be afraid of the other when the USSR and the Allies dumped an immeasurable number of barrels of chemical weapons captured from defeated Nazi Germany in the Baltic and other seas. And the dumping places are not known to anyone.
    It is strange that it has not yet bombed. The barrels just rot and very quickly, and the pressure difference is not small.
    1. kalibr
      kalibr 12 December 2015 16: 45
      +2
      There have already been cases of raising ammunition with mustard gas nets and poisoning of fishermen. But the places are just known and marked on maps and it is forbidden to catch there. But, of course, in any big business there are schools. They were here and this is the most unpleasant thing. Something was not done, something was drowned in the wrong place ...
  17. ICT
    ICT 12 December 2015 22: 55
    +1
    Quote: kalibr
    who writes such publications


    hi from childhood wink
  18. Ykrofashist
    Ykrofashist 13 December 2015 00: 10
    0
    Bombs are NOT SAFE (I can not reliably know what the DNA mutations caused by radionuclides can lead to). But because of the chemical and biological things, I’m a lot dumber
    Quote: kalibr
    There have already been cases of raising ammunition with mustard gas nets and poisoning of fishermen. But the places are just known and marked on maps and it is forbidden to catch there. But, of course, in any big business there are schools. They were here and this is the most unpleasant thing. Something was not done, something was drowned in the wrong place ...
  19. Seneca
    Seneca 13 December 2015 03: 27
    +1
    Two planets meet and one other complains. People started up on me .. they all looked up. Another one, don’t worry, it will pass by itself. It’s true that if you manage to invent nuclear weapons, you’ll be a little tempered and everything’s all right. smile