wulf42 Posted April 6, 2009 Report Share Posted April 6, 2009 Well, now that that's over, we still have thousands of nuclear warheads that can destroy the world many times over. The assumption from the "don't worry, be happy" crowd is that mutually assured destruction will stop anyone from using them. But, what about Ahmadinejad? And there are likely others willing to see what happens, who are looking forward to the "war to end all wars." As long as nothing happens, complacency rules. But what happens if several missiles or suitcase nukes are set off in the U.S. or Russia -- would either leader be willing to let his country die and leave the rest of the world alone? Or will there be a response like the rumoured mythical "Samson Project" that claims the Israelis will incinerate as much of the MiddleEast as possible in the event of a nuclear attack on Isreal. Would a U.S. or Russian attack be different, or would they want to take their enemies down with them, regardless of who they felt made the direct attack? As long as there are thousands of nukes out there, we are still at risk of being wiped out at any given moment! I agree with you...........there are to many Nukes out there,even if Russia and the U.S. cuts their nuke arsenal in half they can still kill each other many times over! if they both launch on each other at the same time it will be over in 20 minutes, it is a catch 22 we don't like them but we need them to prevent an attack, as far as Iran goes my personal opinion is we should take them out right now why wait until they go Nuclear? but rest Assured the Israeli's will deal that blow. The bottom line is with all the countries and terrorist groups trying to get their hands on a Nuke and willingness to use them... we will be lucky to see the next 5 years! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted April 6, 2009 Report Share Posted April 6, 2009 (edited) I agree with you...........there are to many Nukes out there,even if Russia and the U.S. cuts their nuke arsenal in half they can still kill each other many times over! if they both launch on each other at the same time it will be over in 20 minutes, it is a catch 22 we don't like them but we need them to prevent an attack, as far as Iran goes my personal opinion is we should take them out right now why wait until they go Nuclear? but rest Assured the Israeli's will deal that blow. The bottom line is with all the countries and terrorist groups trying to get their hands on a Nuke and willingness to use them... we will be lucky to see the next 5 years! If you really want to sleep well, keep in mind the Russians have something like 5000 tons of weaponized variola India-1967 sitting in poorly guarded storage on Vozrozhdeniye Island (no longer an island) in the Aral Sea. We'd wish it was an A-Bomb at that point... Then there's ... Edited April 6, 2009 by DogOnPorch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wulf42 Posted April 6, 2009 Report Share Posted April 6, 2009 If you really want to sleep well, keep in mind the Russians have something like 5000 tons of weaponized variola India-1967 sitting in poorly guarded storage on Vozrozhdeniye Island (no longer an island) in the Aral Sea.We'd wish it was an A-Bomb at that point... Then there's ... This guy is the reason....we must always keep our Nukes....we being the West...lol the threat is always there....it should be made known to the countries and to terrorists groups that an attack of this type will be have a Nuclear response wholesale to those held responible! And quite honestly we should be planning similiar attacks on them using biological and nerve agents....why should we play fair they don't...if we don t get them they will get us that simple really.....drop some nerve gas down those cave complexes in Pakistan and it's goodbye Al-Qaeda! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 This guy is the reason....we must always keep our Nukes....we being the West...lolthe threat is always there....it should be made known to the countries and to terrorists groups that an attack of this type will be have a Nuclear response wholesale to those held responible! And quite honestly we should be planning similiar attacks on them using biological and nerve agents....why should we play fair they don't...if we don t get them they will get us that simple really.....drop some nerve gas down those cave complexes in Pakistan and it's goodbye Al-Qaeda! That guy is serious, too. At first I thought he was just musing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wulf42 Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 That guy is serious, too. At first I thought he was just musing. I know it's scary.............and he is only one of many! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 No doubt apologists would say: 1. mistranslation... 2. he doesn't represent mainstream Islam... 3. out of context...he's actually against killing millions of Americans. 4. blah, blah, blah... As Mr Dylan said/sang so well.... Don't need a weatherman to tell which way the wind blows. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 That guy is serious, too. At first I thought he was just musing. Well, there has always been very competent musing available, like this from Dr. Strangelove: Where is Major Kong: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- General Turgidson: One, our hopes for recalling the 843rd bomb wing are quickly being reduced to a very low order of probability. Two, in less than fifteen minutes from now the Russkies will be making radar contact with the planes. Three, when the do, they are going to go absolutely ape, and they're gonna strike back with everything they've got. Four, if prior to this time, we have done nothing further to suppress their retaliatory capabilities, we will suffer virtual annihilation. Now, five, if on the other hand, we were to immediately launch an all out and coordinated attack on all their airfields and missile bases we'd stand a damn good chance of catching 'em with their pants down. Hell, we got a five to one missile superiority as it is. We could easily assign three missiles to every target, and still have a very effective reserve force for any other contingency. Now, six, an unofficial study which we undertook of this eventuality, indicated that we would destroy ninety percent of their nuclear capabilities. We would therefore prevail, and suffer only modest and acceptable civilian casualties from their remaining force which would be badly damaged and uncoordinated. Muffley: General, it is the avowed policy of our country never to strike first with nuclear weapons. Turgidson: Well, Mr. President, I would say that General Ripper has already invalidated that policy. (laughs) Muffley: That was not an act of national policy and there are still alternatives left open to us. Turgidson: Mr. President, we are rapidly approaching a moment of truth both for ourselves as human beings and for the life of our nation. Now, the truth is not always a pleasant thing, but it is necessary now make a choice, to choose between two admittedly regrettable, but nevertheless, distinguishable post-war environments: one where you got twenty million people killed, and the other where you got a hundred and fifty million people killed. Muffley: You're talking about mass murder, General, not war. Turgidson: Mr. President, I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed. But I do say... no more than ten to twenty million killed, tops. Uh... depended on the breaks. Muffley: I will not go down in history as the greatest mass murderer since Adolph Hitler! Turgidson: Perhaps it might be better, Mr. President, if you were more concerned with the American people, than with your image in the history books! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 (edited) I love it when Kong goes over the . Edited April 7, 2009 by DogOnPorch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 I love it when Kong goes over the check list for the survival kit. Yea....Slim Pickens was a stitch as "Major Kong". More to the point, and as we have discussed on prior posts, the world has faced far graver nuclear circumstances in the past, and was smart enough to recognize the danger while laughing at the same time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 Yea....Slim Pickens was a stitch as "Major Kong". More to the point, and as we have discussed on prior posts, the world has faced far graver nuclear circumstances in the past, and was smart enough to recognize the danger while laughing at the same time. Indeed. You probably know of a few 'events' that we regular plebs don't, as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 Right on, loose, shifting focus is at the core of the issue. A minute ago we were talking "nuclear free", now it's all about "balance of power". Which one it would be, after all? Nuclear free is balance of power - either all have the ultimate weapon (balance of power) or none have it (balance of power). As long as one empire can intimidate the other - then it's off balance - America - Russia and China are the primary super powers with France running a third...It maybe about entitlement..are the traditional powers entitled to remain the super ones? Look at the history of these nations since the inception of the bomb..have they done a good job and is the world better because THEY were in control or is it worse? Would Iran or Korea be a threat to global balance of power? The problem with fledgling nuclear nations is delivery systems and the amount of reliable nukes that can be dropped on the head of the other ---- IF Iran or Korea was to have a bomb it would not matter much because the SUPERPOWERS have more - Then - It would all start again - the nuclear arms race - the upstarts need not more nukes but more missles...and suit case nukes just are not powerful enough to remove a city..just damage it...so are we to get back to a new nuclear arms race or are we to learn from our mistakes that it was not worth it - that people go hungry and economys fail - maybe we need to get rid of the poverty that brings about war - and the greed that brings about war? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 Indeed. You probably know of a few 'events' that we regular plebs don't, as well. Oh sure...each carefully categorized as nuclear accidents or incidents, complete with classified codewords later to be made into Hollywood movies. It's like any other grim job, you can't keep your sanity without some black humor and comedy. True story: during the Iranian Hostage Crisis, we programmed the Poseidon missile fire control system to print out ASCII art of the Ayatollah Khomeini for dart board targets in the crew's mess! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 Oh sure...each carefully categorized as nuclear accidents or incidents, complete with classified codewords later to be made into Hollywood movies. It's like any other grim job, you can't keep your sanity without some black humor and comedy. True story: during the Iranian Hostage Crisis, we programmed the Poseidon missile fire control system to print out ASCII art of the Ayatollah Khomeini for dart board targets in the crew's mess! Give it up Cheney - Bush ...You are no longer the empire the controls the world - YOU used to bribe people into submission - now you have no money - so be still and stop showing off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 Give it up Cheney - Bush ...You are no longer the empire the controls the world - YOU used to bribe people into submission - now you have no money - so be still and stop showing off. Then why are you so worried about "nukes" ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 Then why are you so worried about "nukes" ? Takes a while to get your attention there boy! I have no worries about nukes what so ever - Human goodness out weighs stupidity and evil - the proof is in the pudding - We have had over 60 years to destroy our selves - yet we live - because man kind in it's eccense is good...or if that were not the case we would not be chatting in good faith at this moment - we are alive! That is a miracle and a great accomplishment that all of humanity can share --- we hold fire yet we do not burn ourselves or others...so do you need more water from the Red - you hot head.. ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 BC ---- come on now - don't turn into a slouch pulling the all party facist line - you were don't so well then you became fearful --- where is that original American free spirit and daring ? Did the folks in China take it on you? The statue of Liberty would vomit if it were conscious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myata Posted April 7, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 For once we seem to be all finding a consensus here. Nuke free is just a dream. Pipe dream. We will always have one, by default, if only to maintain "balance of power", and with our generous example, who'd fancy to drop theirs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kactus Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 For once we seem to be all finding a consensus here. Nuke free is just a dream. Pipe dream.We will always have one, by default, if only to maintain "balance of power", and with our generous example, who'd fancy to drop theirs? The irony is, the only superpower today that preaches other countries on 'pre-emptive strike' is the one that actually deployed nuclear bomb against another nation! (Hiroshima) And yet we are to believe that Iran is gonna use it against Israel! No wait! Whilst at it let's shift the goal post and change the scenario to add more gravitas for the rationale. Namely it is for protecting our interest in the region. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 The irony is, the only superpower today that preaches other countries on 'pre-emptive strike' is the one that actually deployed nuclear bomb against another nation! (Hiroshima) While other nations preach the same thing without being/doing either. Go figure..... And yet we are to believe that Iran is gonna use it against Israel! No wait! Whilst at it let's shift the goal post and change the scenario to add more gravitas for the rationale. Namely it is for protecting our interest in the region. What's wrong with that? What other kind of interests do you have in mind? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kactus Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 (edited) While other nations preach the same thing without being/doing either. Go figure..... And point being??? Talking about it and doing it are two different things! What's wrong with that? What other kind of interests do you have in mind? Nothing! So long we are clear this is the real reason not people like yourself claiming Iran is gonna "wipe Israel off the map" which was initially said for Iran not having nuclear programme. Edited April 7, 2009 by kactus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 (edited) And point being??? Talking about it and doing it are two different things! Talking about it? Perhaps you don't know about Canada's role in the development of nuclear weapons. Nothing! So long we are clear this is the real reason not people like yourself claiming Iran is gonna "wipe Israel off the map" which was initially said for Iran not having nuclear programme. I never made any such claim...that was I'madinnerjob! France's former President Chirac backed that up with his own threat to use nuclear weapons on Iran. Sorry...but the world is not "fair". Edited April 7, 2009 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 Sorry...but the world is not "fair". What is it with the 'war must be fair' crap these days? News Flash!! Date-line: The Central Pacific.The Battle of Midway was called off today due to the Japanese having six aircraft carriers to the American's mere three. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kactus Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 Talking about it? Perhaps you don't know about Canada's role in the development of nuclear weapons. Please enlighten us! I never made any such claim...that was I'madinnerjob! France's former President Chira backed that up with his own threat to use nuclear weapons on Iran. Sorry...but the world is not "fair". So perhaps you would also recall that the same president also said there's no problem with Iran having one or two atomic bombs in one of his speeches. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 What is it with the 'war must be fair' crap these days? These are the same people who wouldn't let us play dodge ball or keep score on the playground. We are all winners! (hug hug) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 These are the same people who wouldn't let us play dodge ball or keep score on the playground. We are all winners! (hug hug) And of course...outnumbered 2-1 in carriers and 10-1 in surface ships, the Americans still won the Battle of Midway. Makes those historic turning points that much sweeter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.