I doubt it, they do have earthquakes naturally there - but the recent quake that killed approx. 5,000 folks there north of Kabul, right around the same time there was a report of a discovery of an underground bioweapons lab discovered out there . . . at least made me think. Bush Jr's handlers have talked over the last month about easing the policy restrictions on nuke usage. And a ground penetrating small (tactical) nuke such as the B61-11 could simulate a quake, or if near a fault set one off. Again, I doubt we did that - but the thought occured. Any thoughts folks?
Well, nuke isn't necessary A nuke isn't necessary. While I am going to leave blame for this one with nature, it is possible that we've simply hit the right place with a conventional weapon and the cumulative damage just happened to set off a reaction that eventually caused an earthquake. We could get the same reaction out of San Andreas if we hit the right place with the right ordnance. thanx, Tiassa Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I don't think anybody said anything that made their inner thoughts clear (what they are "considering" or not) regarding the architecture of the area. Certainly not clear enough to make any assumptions about what we were thinking/considering. We were talking of the source of the earthquake - clearly poor architecture would raise the death toll, but this diverges from the initial point.
