Active Now

Element 99
Discussion » Statements » Rosie's Corner » Instead of using that $25 billion to build a dam* wall why not use it to building BOMB SHELTERS to REALLY protect the people?
RosieG

Instead of using that $25 billion to build a dam* wall why not use it to building BOMB SHELTERS to REALLY protect the people?

How many bomb  shelters can be built to  protect huge masses of people in every  city? Start building now. With a warmonger Bolton and a button-pushing prez who likes to test his toys I think it is going to be inevitable. There are no cooler heads to prevail. The doofygoofylucy prez does what he wants when he wants to whom he wants however often he wants and no can stop him. They are all chickeny scairdy cats. Those who have no stomach for it are bailing..quitting..leaving. The jobs will be wide open for DEMS.  We need Bomb shelters to hold 100,000 people in  each location with enough sanitation facilities so we don't die of disease, food, water, medical supplies, beds, blankets and air purifying systems. Anyone good with numbers who can tackle the cost? How far will $25 billion go?

Posted - April 12, 2018
Tags : None

Responses


  • Bomb Shelters? Ok. It would make more sense to pile up the cash and make a bonfire out of it than to build bomb shelters. We've been looking for the sky to fall ever since old Harry Truman (A Democrat) dropped a couple of nukes during WWII. You look for mad bombers and warmongers behind every tree, yet we don't seem to be ducking and dodging missiles. More death, doom and dire warnings from the left where the noise is loud and the facts are few.
      April 12, 2018 10:18 AM MDT
    0

  • 113301
    Another fair and even-tempered and uninsulting balanced reply. You are amazing. Thank you and Happy Friday.
      April 13, 2018 2:43 AM MDT
    0

  • 10513
    Well I bet you couldn't even build one massive nuclear bomb shelter for 25 billion dollars. Might be cheaper and more just if Trump and his people gives up their spots in the shelter they will be whisked to if a  nuclear war is about to happen. Their spots could go to some common folks that would probably do a better job at building a new world then Trump and his friends and family would build. Cheers!
      April 12, 2018 1:01 PM MDT
    1

  • 113301
    I dunno Nanoose. I can't see goofydoofylucy ever doing anything like that. He would ONLY be concerned with himself first and foremost. Evidence of that exists in that he walked ahead of his wife and son with an umbrella when it was apparently raining. They trailed behind him umbrellaless. He didn't even look at them. He is so full of himself he is unable to see beyond his corpulent body. His world consists of "me myself I". Beyond that he has no interests. So you think that $25 billion wouldn't even pay for one 100,000 occupancy bomb shelter? Oh dear. Thank you for your reply! :)
      April 13, 2018 2:40 AM MDT
    0

  • 6023
    Because in the modern world of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons ... bomb shelters are near worthless.

    And with the advances in nano-technology and genetically-targeted weapons, it won't be long before we don't have to worry about "collateral damage".
      April 12, 2018 1:13 PM MDT
    1

  • 113301
    They are Walt? So one couldn't build an impenetrable fortress underground no matter how deep it was? Thank you for your reply and Happy Friday.  What shall we do? Are we doomed?
      April 13, 2018 2:42 AM MDT
    0

  • 6023

    Nope.
    It's so simple to build a "burrowing" weapon.

    Stationary defenses are always rendered obsolete by newer weapons.
    That's why we don't build castles as military posts anymore.  (And why France doesn't defend the Maginot Line.)
    So even if you could build something "impenetrable" against modern weapon technology ... that just creates a challenge for future weapon designers.  And it would only be a matter of time until someone figured out how to use technology - perhaps a "rail gun" or energy weapon - to defeat the defenses.  And for far less money than it cost to build and maintain the fortress.

    Even Cheyenne Mountain (NORAD) is on the verge of becoming obsolete as a shelter, due to advances in technology.

    And let's be honest ... in case of large scale nuclear/bio/chem warfare ... or to shelter from an Extinction Level Event (EG: asteroid hit) ... you would have to stay in the shelter for generations before the surface was habitable.

      April 13, 2018 7:13 AM MDT
    0