Is there a “Neither” option?
Wait, wait, wait, this isn’t a cop-out. I’m still answering the question.
I guess I would drop some bombs…. but not the Atomic bomb. No, I’m talking about a radically different sort of bomb…
Warning: Several Thousand Small, Furry Creatures were harmed in the making of this information
- What would be my best option without building a bomb shelter, to survive a nuclear war?
- Would the US win without the bombs? What would be the what cost? And why drop the bombs on Japan and not Germany?
- Combien de force faudrait-il pour séparer la Floride du reste des États-Unis (en faire une île)? Quels effets cela aurait-il?
- How can a police bomb disposal units be used in an offensive roles?
- Will Donald Trump ever bomb North Korea?
Before I come out and say it, what do a US Army Aifield, small flying mammals, and several tiny incendiaries have in common?
Project X-ray, better known as the “Bat-Bomb,” was a canister around the size of a 250–500lb bomb with thousands of compartments, each containing one Mexican Free-Tailed Bat. These were no ordinary bats, however: each bat, capable of lifting almost three times its own weight, had a time-delay incendiary strapped to it. When the bomb was dropped, the canister fell open, the bats fell out, and each would fly out and roost in an attic, fuel storage facility, tree, et cetera. After a while, the time-delay would expire, triggering the incendiary, roasting the unfortunate bat and any objects that it happened to be around. In a sense, it’s the world’s first Cluster Bomb Unit with Smart capabilities.
The theory was, since Japanese houses and buildings often had large amounts of wood and paper involved in their construction, and since roosting bats were considered sacred, they could carry incendiaries into previously inaccessible locations and cause widespread fires.
The test results? It’s not only paper and wooden buildings that are susceptible to the Bat-Bomb; during the tests, errant bats roosted in the hangars and fuel storage facilities of Carlsbad Airfield, burning it, along with the mock-up “Japanese Village,” completely to the ground.
Later, it would be predicted that the Bat-bomb would, in larger numbers, cause around a thousand times more fires per bomb-load than regular incendiary devices currently used.
The project was cancelled when it was learned that it would most-likely not be ready until mid-1945, and there was already another “incendiary” believed to be capable of causing much more damage to cities: The Manhattan Project.
So, let’s compare:
- A much-less lethal weapon: unlike the Atomic Bomb, the fires resulting from the bats, while debilitating and destructive to morale and industry, do not vaporize everything in their blast radius
- Much cheaper to produce, and able to be deployed in larger numbers, than their Atomic counterpart.
- Bats do not leave radioactive fallout.
- Bats do not usher in a new age of atomic fear.
- Very inhumane to the bats
- If used en-masse, could have large ecological implications due to the depletion of bat populations
- Not nearly as terrifying, morale-wise, as an Atomic Bomb
Atomic Bomb Cons/Pros (They’re all pretty much the same):
- Incredibly lethal
- Releases radioactive fallout
- Ushered-in a new age of atomic fear
- Incredibly Terrifying to all involved