Are these war porn articles really necessary? It really just is unpleasant to read this propaganda about indiscriminate weapons of mass destruction, furthering an undeclared arms race and weapons that are about 30 years too late to be useful. This kind of thoughtless, military fetishism is completely amoral and absolutely discredited to the point where you could even call it anti-intellectual. Please put this Jurassic crap in the bin where it belongs.

... as reading the word "Boffin" again and again and again...

Come on Reg, it's almost as predictable as everything exciting in the U.S. being "awesome".

No need to develop modern weapons to address modern threats.

Back to pointy sticks and rocks!

"Technology Can Be Used For Bad Things Shocker".

Just because you don't like the use of technology, it doesn't mean it shouldn't be reported on. I didn't see anything to make the article "propaganda" - in fact the whole tone of the article was written in the mildly sarcastic tone we have come to love from El Reg, poking a little fun at the Mother of All Democracies in the process.

I suggest you wind your neck in a little and chill out.

Um, since when is the comparitively small military budget of the People's Republic excessive? It's the Americans who pour never-ending trillions into their military and into foreign wars on foreign soil. What the Chinese spend is a drop in the bucket compared.

...better to do it with a high-tech conventional explosive, than a small nuclear device.

Easier on the environment, easier on the people who might want to live in that area again someday. Of course it would be better to not have to blow up stuff at all, but as long as its necessary we might as well do it as cleanly as possible.

They spend alot building stuff like this so countrys like iran won't want to kidnap its citizens.

>They spend alot building stuff like this so countrys like iran won't want to kidnap its citizens.

if the trident nuclear missile that the UK holds (maximum yield of something like four megatons I believe) doesn't deter Iran from such actions why should this bomb do so?

I like the thought of the top brass not being able to hide in the Fuhrer-bunker while grunts are getting shot/blasted/whatevered in the name of <insert cause>, coming out to surrender and go abroad with their pilfered money when they run out of sorry SOBs willing to be shot/blasted/etc. So *this* is what they mean when they say that they want to bring democracy to <insert name of current enemy>...

> Are these war porn articles really necessary?

More please! Especially with El Reg's special sense of humour.

Hey, I want a 30,000lb can of a**-whoop too!

I've even got a 3ft long 1/18th scale F-16 fighter plane model too, that I picked up at the airshow last month.

Finally my country is spending money on something other than welfare scum popping out their litters of snotmonkeys.

I seriously doubt that this munition has been developed to drop on Dubya, Dick Cheney, and their fellow chicken-hawks.

Nuclear weapons won't ever deter small scale shenanigans like kidnapping stray / not stray service personnel because for some reason using them is seen as being morally wrong. So, they can only be used in a Mutually Assured Destruction retaliation context.

Killing 1000's with anything other than nuclear / chemical / biological devices, however, is seen as OK. Therefore they can be used in preemptive strikes.

BTW, I would imaging blowing up a nuclear fuel processing / bomb making plant would make a bit of a radioactive mess however it was done.

Best tactic for avoiding kidnap is to maybe not be within a couple of Km of folk that might want some kidnappees in the first place. Or, maybe take this advice http://www.bumperart.com/ProductDetails.aspx?SKU=2004011539&productID=859