OMG teh nukezorz!

[Teta_Bonita]

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=42796
I'm scared. hold me.....

 

[lePobz]

It's true, if they didn't have nukes then america would just walk all over them in the name of anti-terrorism.

Well done N.Korea.

 

[The Monkey]

Oh lord...I fear what these weapons can do in the hands of regimes like NK.

 

[NeptuneUK]

what doesnt make sense, is that its acceptable for the USA to stockpile thousands of nukes, but the USA dont allow anyone else to have any nuclear weapons

 

[Sulkdodds]

With NK in the hands of that King John guy, nobody is safe.

 

[lePobz]

With America in the hands of that dumbass Bush guy, nobody is safe.

 

[The Monkey]

what doesnt make sense, is that its acceptable for the USA to stockpile thousands of nukes, but the USA dont allow anyone else to have any nuclear weapons

The declared nuclear powers are, the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, France, the People's Republic of China, India and Pakistan. In addition, Israel almost certainly has nuclear weapons, though it refuses to publicly state whether it possesses them or not (see Israel and weapons of mass destruction). North Korea has claimed to American diplomats that it possesses nuclear weapons (though this has not been substantiated); Ukraine may possess a nuclear stockpile due to a clerical error; and Iran is allegedly developing the capacity to produce its own nuclear arsenal. See the list of countries with nuclear weapons for more details.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon

 

[MiccyNarc]

It's true, if they didn't have nukes then america would just walk all over them in the name of anti-terrorism.

Well done N.Korea.

Easy for you to make those comments, mr. "I'm on the opposite side of the world in a country that is not the target of terrorists".

With America in the hands of that dumbass Bush guy, nobody is safe.

Yes, I'm sure you're really threatened!!!
So much for using logic.

what doesnt make sense, is that its acceptable for the USA to stockpile thousands of nukes, but the USA dont allow anyone else to have any nuclear weapons

What about France? Israel? Etc. etc.? I don't see us taking stopping them from having nukes. But nooooo, we're mister evil US and we can't have nukes 'cause we're big and mean!!1!!111111!1
I don't think nations that would use nukes should have them. I don't see the US nuking anyone anytime soon.
If we were, I wouldn't be living here anymore.

 

[lePobz]

"Ooh no the nasty evil terrorists are trying to kill us all, better go out and invade all the nasty evil countries and take their weapons away!"

"Hooray for Bush, he's our saviour! He said he's going to go and hunt all the nasty evil terrorists!!!"

Well all this terrorist bull***t got him another term in office, not to mention him getting to place his best chums as leaders of the countries he invades.

The only reason N.K wants nukes is to make America think twice about sticking their nose into their business aswell. The whole situation is stupid. Instead of disarming the world, America is just helping to make every country defend itself with a nuclear arsenal.

Guess it's kind of like the stupid gun situation in America. One person in the 'hood' buys a gun, and so everybody else has to go out and buy guns to defend themselves from the first guy. Eventually everyone has guns and nobody dare go out without a gun. F***ing stupid logic there.

 

[marksmanHL2 :)]

I'm not afraid of governments having nuclear weapons at all really.... no one is stupid enough to use them. They are used for political leverage and thats about it.


I could be wrong. But I feel better thinking I'm right

 

[burner69]

"Ooh no the nasty evil terrorists are trying to kill us all, better go out and invade all the nasty evil countries and take their weapons away!"

"Hooray for Bush, he's our saviour! He said he's going to go and hunt all the nasty evil terrorists!!!"

Well all this terrorist bull***t got him another term in office, not to mention him getting to place his best chums as leaders of the countries he invades.

The only reason N.K wants nukes is to make America think twice about sticking their nose into their business aswell. The whole situation is stupid. Instead of disarming the world, America is just helping to make every country defend itself with a nuclear arsenal.

Guess it's kind of like the stupid gun situation in America. One person in the 'hood' buys a gun, and so everybody else has to go out and buy guns to defend themselves from the first guy. Eventually everyone has guns and nobody dare go out without a gun. F***ing stupid logic there.

Totally agreed.
NK would gain nothing from attacking America with nuclear weapons, they'd get blown away the minute they did. Nuclear weapons area deterrent from attack, and Bush and his friends are showing what happens to countries without them - see Iraq.
A war based around lies will make a lot more countries wary, and give them all the more reason to arm themselves accordingly.

 

[Razor]

Easy for you to make those comments, mr. "I'm on the opposite side of the world in a country that is not the target of terrorists".



Yes, I'm sure you're really threatened!!!
So much for using logic.

What about France? Israel? Etc. etc.? I don't see us taking stopping them from having nukes. But nooooo, we're mister evil US and we can't have nukes 'cause we're big and mean!!1!!111111!1
I don't think nations that would use nukes should have them. I don't see the US nuking anyone anytime soon.
If we were, I wouldn't be living here anymore.

You have to remember your history lessons, there is only one government and one leader who has authorised the use of nuclear weapons as an offensive weapon, in this case, 2 civilian targets. I will also tell you that one of the proposed targets for the atom bombs during World War 2 was the city of Kyoto, no military importance at all interms of Japan's defense, but very highly spiritual place with lot of religious importance.


The question though isn't what sort of nuclear capabilities North Korea has, but what are the capabilities of their delivery platforms. Do they possess icbms?

 

[baron insig]

agreed^

im scared !

Britain should retake over the world!

 

[Sulkdodds]

Nukes are like Mounts in WoW...a status symbol to show your country is big and strong. Nobody really wants to use them and I doubt anybody ever will but you only need one country to be ruled by a man who is prepared to use nukes...the question is, which country is it, if either?

 

[Dalamari]

Woot, we are gonna kick some Korean ass now!

**gets ready to hear the millions of country songs to be made about kicking Korean ass in the name of freedom**

 

[lePobz]

Woot, we are gonna kick some Korean ass now!

**gets ready to hear the millions of country songs to be made about kicking Korean ass in the name of freedom**

Actually Dalamari, the whole point of this is that you're not going to be touching any Korean ass with a barge pole.

 

[Razor]

**gets ready to hear the millions of country songs to be made about kicking Korean ass in the name of freedom**

Lol, why does that remind me so much of Team America .

 

[Teta_Bonita]

what doesnt make sense, is that its acceptable for the USA to stockpile thousands of nukes, but the USA dont allow anyone else to have any nuclear weapons

Because we can trust ourselves! :thumbs:

 

[kirovman]

Fighting the N. Korean army will be like fighting the Japanese in world war 2. Very brutal. And they have a million soliders, all ready to fight to the death. Maybe not technologically advanced, but they have the mindset.
And I don't think China would allow a pre-emptive attack on N. Korea, like what happened with Iraq.

 

[Fat Tony!]

Easy for you to make those comments, mr. "I'm on the opposite side of the world in a country that is not the target of terrorists".

He is british so he is a target for terrorists as much as you are. Btw this should be in the politics section, everyone behaves like complete bastards in politics threads so please keep them out of my sight

 

[burner69]

Because we can trust ourselves! :thumbs:

Actually the US is the only country to use nuclear weapons offensively. And also if you look carefully you'll see that the US's foreign policy kills more innocent people than Saddam ever did.

You may trust the government, people on the recieving end don't.

 

[Milkman]

I'm not afraid of governments having nuclear weapons at all really.... no one is stupid enough to use them. They are used for political leverage and thats about it.


I could be wrong. But I feel better thinking I'm right

Thats exactly what I think, but I question Kim Jong's sanity alot of the time so I am worried.

Actually the US is the only country to use nuclear weapons offensively. And also if you look carefully you'll see that the US's foreign policy kills more innocent people than Saddam ever did.

You may trust the government, people on the recieving end don't.

Yes, damn us for using nukes to squash the Imperial Japanese, while an invasion would have costed far more lives for both americans and japanese. But wait, you would want that! More americans die the better right?

 

[burner69]

Yes, damn us for using nukes to squash the Imperial Japanese, while an invasion would have costed far more lives for both americans and japanese. But wait, you would want that! More americans die the better right?

Love how defensive some Americans get.
Do you think that bombing civilian targets was the way to achieve this?

EDIT: Screw it, dont wanna get into a Hiroshima war. I mostly agree with the bombing, though some elements of it I question.

But still, you can't say the US exactly has a trustworthy government.

 

[ComradeBadger]

Heh. The United States changes policy so many times...with it's government.

But to be fair, I don't quite know what to make of the current administration.

 

[Immortal]

Yes, damn us for using nukes to squash the Imperial Japanese, while an invasion would have costed far more lives for both americans and japanese. But wait, you would want that! More americans die the better right?

If the bomb wasn't dropped there would have been considerably less deaths. Think of the long term casualties from radiation poisoning. They had no idea of the kind of affects radiation caused back then.

 

[Razor]

Thats exactly what I think, but I question Kim Jong's sanity alot of the time so I am worried.


Yes, damn us for using nukes to squash the Imperial Japanese, while an invasion would have costed far more lives for both americans and japanese. But wait, you would want that! More americans die the better right?

President Truman ordered the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki for three reasons;

1. To test the weapon against a real target, who cares about predicted death counts and predicted damage when you can drop one on a real city.

2. To show the Soviet Union that not only did America possess such weapons, but they were also fully willing to use them.

3. Japan was more than willing to surrender before the bombings, but they wanted it on a few conditions. America, however, wanted a full, non-conditional surrender.

The Japanese were willing to surrender before both Hiroshima and Nagasaki happened, they wanted to surrender to the American's as they judge the American's less evil then the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union were completely descimating Japanese troops in Manchuria and China at such a rate, that the Japanese were panicing and were in full retreat, the invasion of the Japanese homeland by the Soviet Union would of destroyed Japan and divided it, just like Germany. Also, the Japanese government had no idea what had happened at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, all they knew was that something had happened at both cities but they didn't know the American's had nuclear weapons and they didn't know that it was nuclear weapons that wiped out both cities.

-----

Anyway, enough of that, i will sleep no more restless tonight then i did lastnight or the night before knowing that North Korea has nuclear weapons.

 

[Jangle]

theres a thread about this exact same thing in the politics section, but with a much more serious title.

 

[Tr0n]

Yea...I believe this thread goes to politics.

 

[Steve]

Love how defensive some Americans get.

Not to be a dick or anything, but people get defensive when you put a verbal attack on them.

 

[jondy]

Not to be a dick or anything, but people get defensive when you put a verbal attack on them.

Or a terrorist attack. Heh, heh. heh

 

[lePobz]

No jondyfun, that would be 'offensive' ... and completely misdirected and illegal. But the law has no effect on presidents, right?

 

[kirovman]

The Soviet Union were completely descimating Japanese troops in Manchuria and China at such a rate, that the Japanese were panicing and were in full retreat, the invasion of the Japanese homeland by the Soviet Union would of destroyed Japan and divided it, just like Germany.

But didn't the Soviet Union only declare war on Japan only 1 week before Japan's surrender and after the Hiroshima bombing?

 

[jondy]

No jondyfun, that would be 'offensive' ... and completely misdirected and illegal. But the law has no effect on presidents, right?

Right. But the war was in defense of possible nuclear attack so technically I think my logic's sound :rolling:

Gotta love Rummy's new bunker-busting nuclear spending, too.

 

[Pressure]

Easy for you to make those comments, mr. "I'm on the opposite side of the world in a country that is not the target of terrorists".

Yeah! You've seen how many terrorists we have thwarted in America since 9/11, we are in danger. Oh wait, nevermind we haven't. In my opinion America isn't under any kind of "terrorist threat."

 

[burner69]

Not to be a dick or anything, but people get defensive when you put a verbal attack on them.

Actually he hadn't posted when I made the remark about the US's use of nuclear weapons - so I fail to see how I managed to use a verbal attack on him to make him defensive (he wasn't being that defensive really - my apologies Milkman, I was in a bad mood when typing).

Anyway, never mind... let's debate... (and maybe move this to the political forum)

 

[BlackDahlia]

uh...um...****!

And we totally didn't see this coming. Nope, not at all. [/sarcasm]

 

[Tr0n]

Yeah! You've seen how many terrorists we have thwarted in America since 9/11, we are in danger. Oh wait, nevermind we haven't. In my opinion America isn't under any kind of "terrorist threat."

We wasn't and still aren't in the kind of danger that the goverment says we are.

I watched a TV commercial a couple days ago that was made by homeland security...It had these kids on it asking "what do we do if a terrorist attacks"...then they went on asking "should I call my grandma" and so on and so on.

Reminded me of the old 60's commericals about the soviets invading america.

Shows you how much everything is getting exaggerated beyond belief and how the goverment is trying to control us by fear.

 

[Sulkdodds]

There's the thing, see, what's happening is exactly the same as the way the US built up the Soviet 'mena'ce into this huge unstoppable (imaginary) enemy.

As for the nukes...it is almost certain that Japan was about to surrender anyway, and the main reason the US did it was to show the rest of the world, chiefly the Soviets, that they had nukes and were not afraid to use them. The second nuke, in fact, was simply to show they had more than one, that it wasn't just a one-off.

 

[Zeus]

Good job you guys who voted for Bush, splendid job...

 

[Tr0n]

There's the thing, see, what's happening is exactly the same as the way the US built up the Soviet 'mena'ce into this huge unstoppable (imaginary) enemy.

As for the nukes...it is almost certain that Japan was about to surrender anyway, and the main reason the US did it was to show the rest of the world, chiefly the Soviets, that they had nukes and were not afraid to use them. The second nuke, in fact, was simply to show they had more than one, that it wasn't just a one-off.

Exactly.

So all this basically comes down to is the goverment try to control us through fear.