Oppenhiemer

[AHZ]

You're not good at reading comprehension either.

what have i misconstrued?

[Gunny]

You're not very good at thinking what people believe. You just shouldn't try.

Amen.

[revelarts]

I only asked a question. No satisfactory answer has been supplied as of yet.

satisfactory?
look theres more than enough but.

have you even listened to the evidence I posted here?
i doubt it.

Look i get it, reminds me of the thing where nearly every mother says of a son that's murdered his beautiful kind wife or killed people in a bank robbery.
'I don't believe they'd do that!"
Little evidence is satisfactory. that's not the boy THEY know. Often they won't take the time to look either.
But some will.
And even though some mothers will eventually mentally understand that their lil boy did in fact kill.
Many still can NOT fathom 'why' they did it.

I'm still trying to figure out why Bill Cosby was drugging women when by all accounts he had more than enough charisma & 'game' to get plenty of woman to sleep with him voluntarily. Other comedians report him being surrounded by willing women.
I can make list of things in my own life that don't I have "satisfactory" motives for
or that have had SERIOUSLY self sabotaging ends. Nevertheless I, and others, still actually do inexplicable sh!t.
If the evidence that it happened out weighs the reasons (to your satisfaction) they'd have NOT to do it.
It still means they did it.
the evidence, not the supposed lack of satisfactory motive is what makes the case or not.

(you following the Architect serial killer case... got any satisfactory answers motives for that?)

But hey FJ,
I'm just putting it out there for you.
do with it what you will man.

[fj1200]

satisfactory?
look theres more than enough but.

have you even listened to the evidence I posted here?
i doubt it.

Of course I haven't. It's in video format and worse, audio. But the answer to my question shouldn't be... Because Tuskeegee... Because MKUltra... Because mosquitos... It should be an actual answer, not speculation.

[AHZ]

Amen.

maybe you can explain what i've misconstrued. maybe you can't.

[fj1200]

maybe you can explain what i've misconstrued. maybe you can't.

I could but you couldn't comprehend because of your aforementioned poor reading comprehension skills. Perhaps, you look at what you think I posted and reread what I actually posted; report back.

[AHZ]

I could but you couldn't comprehend because of your aforementioned poor reading comprehension skills. Perhaps, you look at what you think I posted and reread what I actually posted; report back.

give it a try.

i bet you can't without confirming i was right.

[revelarts]

Of course I haven't. It's in video format and worse, audio. But the answer to my question shouldn't be... Because Tuskeegee... Because MKUltra... Because mosquitos... It should be an actual answer, not speculation.

And also a waste of scarce resources. The "why" is a pretty big hurdle to get over to sell this.

ok again...
The U.S. Gov't has a long HISTORY of using it's own people as guinea pigs
re- Tuskegee MKUltra Mosquitos and much more.

So we've establish that when they look big picture (or they are desperate) they don't have a moral check NOT to kill solders/civilians/children & SO much less any check to destroy a munitions ship or 2.
Even on a normal war scale many sacrifices were made in the Pacific, some mistakes some "for the greater good".

So thinking as someone WITHOUT a moral check whats the 'benefit to loss'?
You've poured over a billion dollars, 3 years, used a 7th of the nations energy to create them, literally used tons of US treasury silver to create magnets to make the fissile material etc, built secret cities full of man power, contaminated 56 millions gallons of water in Washington state. and you've got 2 versions of a couple of bombs.
You have calculations but you don't know if they'll work exactly as hoped or how they'll effect people or real military targets.
Do you fly it blind and hope for the best?
Do you make a small test of our investment?
Can you secretly test to be sure, so that when we make an open test, or use it, you don't look like you failed/fools?


so the long version of the answer given previously.

Waste?
They'd already spent over a billion in 1940s dollars working on the bombs.
You think a dock, 1 munitions ship and a few 100 sailors (who they never wanted in the navy anyway) was too a big a waste in the minds of some the "leaders" in our country? To big a hurdle?
Seriously?

Your question was answered.
you just don't like it since for some unknown reason you've placed an unrealistically high bar on the value the leaders placed on a munitions ship and a few hundred sailors as compared to the having clear control & knowledge of the most power weapon in the world... to end the war... and go forward into new world as masters of it.


Heck, I've seen "good" people promote all kind of hellish stuff politically over the years for "safety" & or advantage.
Not to speak of the leaders who generally don't even give a d@mn.

as far as the other details of evidence goes. i'm not going to transcribe the audio it for you. If you want to know you'll listen to it.
but in general it consist of Damning letters from Los Alamos, unexplained film of the 'accident' (classified/destroyed), radiation burns, testimony of mushroom cloud and flash of light, obvious cover up and denials from official parties.and more.

[AHZ]

Of course I haven't. It's in video format and worse, audio. But the answer to my question shouldn't be... Because Tuskeegee... Because MKUltra... Because mosquitos... It should be an actual answer, not speculation.

what's your point, mr questions?

"they wouldn't do that" is all you have, and it's weak sauce.

[fj1200]

give it a try.

i bet you can't without confirming i was right.

Still with the questionable reading comprehension.

what's your point, mr questions?

"they wouldn't do that" is all you have, and it's weak sauce.

[fj1200]

so the long version of the answer given previously.

Your question was answered.

A longer answer of a previously insufficient answer is just more wordy. Surely in the great catalogue of information that gave birth to this revelation has something in it that offers a better answer to why Port Chicago? A valid test does not require killing your own men and wasting war resources.

[revelarts]

A longer answer of a previously insufficient answer is just more wordy. Surely in the great catalogue of information that gave birth to this revelation has something in it that offers a better answer to why Port Chicago? A valid test does not require killing your own men and wasting war resources.

ok

[AHZ]

Still with the questionable reading comprehension.

and yet you can't even clarify yourself.

[AHZ]

A longer answer of a previously insufficient answer is just more wordy. Surely in the great catalogue of information that gave birth to this revelation has something in it that offers a better answer to why Port Chicago? A valid test does not require killing your own men and wasting war resources.

why not port chicago?

[fj1200]

and yet you can't even clarify yourself.

Point out where I used the word "frugal" and the phrase "they wouldn't do that".

why not port chicago?

My first question is the relevant first question. Yours might be a relevant second question.