How bad would a war have to get before someone considers using nukes?

[RapidSnail]

Originally posted by: alyarb
at least they are still comparatively hard to come by, and third world nukes are in the less-than-10 kiloton range. i'm not saying people couldn't get hurt, because they absolutely would. but if we had to justify erasing a country, at least we can actually get through it. when you think about nuclear terrorism, you are talking about a very small, very light, very low-yield device. how else are you going to get it into this country? and what are you going to do with it, put it in a truck or a car? thermonuclear weapons weigh in at hundreds of pounds.

unless china and india start handing out their technology to faggots, a terror-nuke isn't going to be delivered by an aircraft or a rocket. it's going to be a small piece of shit, and it's going to be sneaked in.

lmfao :laugh:

 

[Modelworks]

I kept the pdf files from the DOD on how to survive a nuclear attack for just this reason !
Tip : Dig a very deep hole and climb in .

 

[RapidSnail]

Originally posted by: Rubycon
Someone has to be really MAD to use them.

Text

:thumbsup:

 

[Fayd]

most likely, countries that are developing nuclear weapons will be kept from being able to complete them.

iran's gonna have their nuke facilities destroyed by israel.

NK is gonna have theirs destroyed by japan or SK.

 

[alyarb]

Originally posted by: RapidSnail

lmfao :laugh:

none of you guys are getting my gerbil-up-the-ass reference or whatever the hell it is. i have good jokes that i have to put on hold now.

seriously, how do you sneak a "small piece of shit" into this country if you look like a bearded Art Malik from True Lies? Well, fags have this special compartment they like to use.

 

[Modelworks]

To insure that the master race aka ATOT survives:
http://www.oism.org/nwss/

Be sure to read this also :
http://www.globalsecurity.org/...-02-283/fm4-02-283.pdf

Seriously though that last pdf has lots of good information if you were ever curious about how nuclear blast effect the environment and people.

 

[Fear No Evil]

I'd nuke most of California even though we are not currently at war with them.

 

[paulney]

Highly unlikely
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_hand_(nuclear_war)

 

[BoomerD]

Originally posted by: RapidSnail

Originally posted by: Rubycon
Someone has to be really MAD to use them.

Text

:thumbsup:

fixed that for ya!

 

[RapidSnail]

Originally posted by: BoomerD

Originally posted by: RapidSnail

Originally posted by: Rubycon
Someone has to be really MAD to use them.

Text

:thumbsup:

fixed that for ya!

You missed the reference, but still good choice. :thumbsup:

 

[silverpig]

Originally posted by: RapidSnail

Originally posted by: BoomerD

Originally posted by: RapidSnail

Originally posted by: Rubycon
Someone has to be really MAD to use them.

Text

:thumbsup:

fixed that for ya!

You missed the reference, but still good choice. :thumbsup:

You guys have it all wrong.

 

[BoomerD]

Originally posted by: RapidSnail

Originally posted by: BoomerD

Originally posted by: RapidSnail

Originally posted by: Rubycon
Someone has to be really MAD to use them.

Text

:thumbsup:

fixed that for ya!

You missed the reference, but still good choice. :thumbsup:

Nah, I got the MAD reference in the song...

Originally posted by: silverpig
You guys have it all wrong.

Yeah, Inspector Gadget was a bit after my cartoon watching days.

IIRC, my kids watched it for a couple of years before they outgrew cartoons.

 

[mrkun]

Originally posted by: Mojoed
Depends on the country.

I have a feeling Iran will eventually "lose" a nuke, and very bad things may happen.

Iran has had chemical and biological weapons for decades and they've never "lost" any of them. I don't think nuclear weapons would be an exception.

 

[Udgnim]

I think the most likely source will be Islamic extremists either from Iran or Pakistan (if the shit there keeps getting worse and worse)

I'd find it difficult for any other type of group to let loose a nuke first

someone like Kim Jong Il is more of an attention whore and wants nuclear capability more for bargaining power than actual use

other nuclear powers won't use it due to economic ramifications

however, Islamic extremists blinded by religious zeal & desire for jihad care more for their religious goals than the repercussions & consequences of nuclear use

 

[IGBT]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
I'd nuke most of California even though we are not currently at war with them.

leave em be. they're doing a good job of killing them selves economicaly. achiever class tax payers are leaving and the state is filling up with welfare cases. It won't be long before the parasites hit critical mass.

 

[S Freud]

I think it would depend greatly on the leadership of that country and a clearly defined scenario.

 

[So]

Originally posted by: IGBT

Originally posted by: Newbian
It only takes one to start until everyone else wants to use their fireworks.

and that's the real problem. more then likely a nuclear event will take place in the next 20 years or less. Once it starts, how will it end. I suspect the US would absorb atleast 2 hits in an effort to limit or stop such an event.

People have asserted that for the last fifty years and we're still in the clear.

 

[mrkun]

Originally posted by: Udgnim
I think the most likely source will be Islamic extremists either from Iran or Pakistan (if the shit there keeps getting worse and worse)

I'd find it difficult for any other type of group to let loose a nuke first

someone like Kim Jong Il is more of an attention whore and wants nuclear capability more for bargaining power than actual use

other nuclear powers won't use it due to economic ramifications

however, Islamic extremists blinded by religious zeal & desire for jihad care more for their religious goals than the repercussions & consequences of nuclear use

There aren't any "Islamic extremist" groups in Iran that are independent of the government. Iran's government has the same motivations as KJI. Like I said in my previous post, Iran has had chemical and biological weapons for decades and they've never given them to any of the terrorist/guerrilla groups they support.

 

[compman25]

If I had control of our nukes and I have to read another of your post I'd nuke myself.

 

[Andrew111]

Originally posted by: Brainonska511

Originally posted by: Mojoed
Depends on the country.

I have a feeling Iran will eventually "lose" a nuke, and very bad things may happen.

I don't think the people in charge of Iran are that stupid.

Why would you call this stupid? If Iran really wanted to nuke Israel or some other target.....mutually assured destruction prohibits them from openly launching such a nuclear attack. Better to covertly give such a nuke to terrorists that also want Israel destroyed and let them do it for you.....then they prevent their own destruction since they have plausible deniability that they weren't involved.

 

[iroast]

Originally posted by: Mojoed
Depends on the country.

I have a feeling Iran will eventually "lose" a nuke, and very bad things may happen.

Nostradamus.

 

[GagHalfrunt]

Originally posted by: So

Originally posted by: IGBT

Originally posted by: Newbian
It only takes one to start until everyone else wants to use their fireworks.

and that's the real problem. more then likely a nuclear event will take place in the next 20 years or less. Once it starts, how will it end. I suspect the US would absorb atleast 2 hits in an effort to limit or stop such an event.

People have asserted that for the last fifty years and we're still in the clear.

Love it or hate it, MAD works.

For a country to consider nukes it would have to be on the brink of a crushing apocalypse that would end that country as it exists. Not simply a defeat, but an utter annihilation where the victor will essentially burn it to the ground, murder the men, enslave the women and eat the children. Nothing short of that will do because popping off a nuke is the end of your country. You'd get leveled in return, so it will be an act of "okay, we're dead, but we're taking you with us" and in modern warfare no country has ever faced that utter destruction from a defeat.

 

[Fritzo]

For large countries, they would only be used in reponse to a nuclear strike. For small developing countries---as soon as anyone pisses them off.

 

[darkxshade]

In the case of China vs USA... China would most likely launch theirs as soon as their 10,000 calvalrymen gets mowed down by 2 Abrams tanks.

 

[destrekor]

Originally posted by: ConstipatedVigilante

Originally posted by: Brainonska511

Originally posted by: Mojoed
Depends on the country.

I have a feeling Iran will eventually "lose" a nuke, and very bad things may happen.

I don't think the people in charge of Iran are that stupid.

They are that crazy, though. No doubt they'll pin it on being stolen from Pakistan or something.


For any of the superpowers to start using nukes, they would only do so with the knowledge that their enemies can't (sabotage).

No, the claims would be that as Iran, the future return of their prophet could only be a day of rejoicing if Israel had been nuked, and that they had communication with Allah telling them they must wipe Israel off the face of the planet.
The question is.. when will it happen, and will they only attack Israel or will they also attempt to nuke other countries that support Israel, like the US?