On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 11:22:01 -0500, Pete C. wrote:

> blake murphy wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 01:47:52 -0600, Omelet wrote:
>>
>>> In article >,
>>> sf > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 16:49:07 +0000, Burt Morgan
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>With Russia spending many -billions- on rearmament and new nuclear weapons,
>>>>>I
>>>>>think it's time to clean out and make good the bomb shelter so that it's
>>>>>ready
>>>>>for the inevitable nuclear war. I'm now restocking it with new food.
>>>>>
>>>>>What would you guys suggest I stock my shelter with? Remember these goods
>>>>>have
>>>>>to have a real good shelf life and provide enough nutrition for a family of
>>>>>four
>>>>>for the duration.
>>>>
>>>> You're still fighting the cold war? Turn on the Tube, do some
>>>> reading. North Korea and Pakistan are scarier.
>>>
>>> So is Iran.
>>
>> only if you enjoy being scared. none of those countries are even close to
>> being able to attack the u.s. with nukes.
>
> Yes, actually they are. N. Korea *may* have the capability to hit
> California via a missile (might not be such a bad thing really),
> Pakistan and Iran both have missiles that could easily hit US allies,
> and all three could certainly deliver nukes to the US mainland via other
> means.

those countries are all near u.s. allies, so that's not saying much, and in
any case doesn't amount to 'attacking the u.s.' n. korea's missile and
bomb tests have been mostly duds, so far. and 'other means' usually means
some kind of suitcase bomb, which would be delivered to new york, some
other port city, or washington, not exactly places that have the real
estate required for a backyard bomb shelter.

but if you dig ****ing in your pants, knock yourself out.

blake