It's time we set the moon alight.

There are multiple problems with your analysis and I will construct my case by pointing them out: First, however, my points: 1) There is no net-benefit. -What is the point of blowing up our moon when there is so much education and beauty yet to be enjoyed by it? I would probably get more entertainment from seeing a big flaming ball, but how long would it last? I don't want to be the one to tell my son or daughter that we used to have a big star (even though a moon isn't a star), until we blew it up for a few days of entertainment. 2) Russia (or anyone for that matter) could confuse the launch at the moon as a launch against them. -Just like the cold war, if any missiles start flying far distances, this could be mistaken for an attack. A nuclear attack would be deadly! 3) This would complete the statement that Americans are selfish. -By US making this decision, it leaves out all of the other countries. This furthers the proof that we are selfish and doesn't care about how other people think. There is no way we could get the hundreds of countries to buy into this destroying the moon. Thus the international tension would only increase. 4) Muslims worship Allah, AKA the Moon God -Um… I don't think I need to explain how much more tension could be between America and the general Muslim faith. However, I will explain it anyway. IT WOULD BE BAD! 5) Any miscalculation could mean seeing the dark side of the moon (side we can't see) tumbling toward Earth. It would be the cruelest ‘Now you don't see it, Now you do' joke ever. The Earth is nearly knocked off of its orbit by nuclear weapons let alone the moon. Any sort of miscalculation could mean Earth's gravity becoming too great and having it tumble towards Earth. Now against your ‘benefits': Against 1) It would NOT equal more crops. -I mean really? Crops take months to grow they don't just grow over night. Furthermore, they grow from SUN LIGHT which is different from a nuclear fire. The moon is sometimes on the sunny side of the earth. -Even if you can (somehow) prove that the nuclear fire would equal the photons that travel to the earth from the sun, you have to see that if the moon stays in its regular orbit, then it would only help half of the time. ---------Extension of the argument: Imagine if there were two flaming balls that you had to look at while driving! -I mean seriously, if there was a flaming ball (sun) in the West and another flaming ball (Moon) in ANY other direction, it would just be another problem with the drivers. This would increase the number #1 killer of teens and who knows, perhaps a nuke war would come from that. The fire would eventually go out. Even if there could be a longer crop while the moon was lit of fire, it would be useless after a while because the moon would eventually seize to exist. Against 2) 1) I would normally be so pushy, but I would really like some evidence on this point. I don't see the connection. 2) It would take a LOT of energy savings to make up for the energy required to send a missile to the moon. You have the fuel for the multiple launches AND the nuclear energy inside. Against 3) 1) Cross-Apply how the moon can be on either side (light or dark). 2) Cross-Apply how the moon would eventually dissipate into nothing. Thus, any possible decrease in crimes would be temporary at best. 3) The ONLY crime that happens more at night is rape. The rest of them are on a more consistent cycle during light hours. So by your logic, we would be increasing crime. (I can find evidence if you push for it. I ask you to push for evidence that isn't the typical crime at night Hollywood aspect.) In the end, what am I waiting for?... Actual logic for doing this OTHER than some random form of entertainment. There are plenty of other things that can give me logic other then blowing up the moon.