Nuclear Grenades? Maybe we should hold back on this one?

Honestly, I'm not even sure how to discuss this article. The idea of a fallout grenade seems unnecessarily cruel, even more than other nuclear weapons. Besides that, it seems completely counterproductive as I cannot imagine how one could detonate such a device without the worries of being contaminated. So, I guess the idea is to detonate the device, wait two weeks for your enemy to die of radiation poisoning, and then get monthly check ups for yourself. Again, I'm just not sure where the researchers were going on this one. Oh wait... it's called a 'dirty bomb.'
This is yet another article from the Washington Post printed on August 9th, 1959.

RC Fallout Sweeper

It's nice to know that if you were stuck in a bunker for a few weeks, assuming the best of circumstances, that you could immediately get to work with your handy radiation sweeper (still intact of course). Now the only problem is where to dump the hopper. Not in my back yard...

[Washington Post, December 30th, 1959]

Nuke the Moon?

This is one of the most bizarre articles which I have come upon, hence the site's name. It was posted in The Washington Post on the 3rd of June, 1969. As noted in the article, this just barely predates the Apollo 11 moon landing. In my studies, I have come across some very unconventional ideas for the uses of nuclear weapons and energy, however this proposal seems to top them all. It is worth noting that the Atmospheric Test Ban Treaty had been signed in 1963, limiting nuclear weapons testing to underground venues only. If you are familiar with Teller, it seems clear that he likely viewed the moon as a nice way around this. Shoot the Moon.