poll; How do you feel about nuclear weapons?

[masterxfob]

weapons are for pu$$ies! we should go out bare fisted and pummel each other to settle disputes.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Jmman
They are obviously a few misinformed people in this thread. One US sub does not have enough firepower to "kill all life". Sorry, you are way off the mark. Secondly, there is no way to put the genie back in the bottle. Lastly, there could be limited nuclear exchanges without drastic climatic or ecological changes on earth. Do you guys now how many nuclear test detonations have taken place in the last 50 years? 2051!! Over 2000 explosions, including a 50 Megaton exposion in the atmosphere by the Russians, and last time I checked Earth was doing just fine......

heheheh pwned!


there is something to be said about holding your opponent's population centers hostage. the scary part comes when the opponent doesn't have or doesn't care about its population centers.

 

[Ultima]

Originally posted by: Jmman
They are obviously a few misinformed people in this thread. One US sub does not have enough firepower to "kill all life". Sorry, you are way off the mark. Secondly, there is no way to put the genie back in the bottle. Lastly, there could be limited nuclear exchanges without drastic climatic or ecological changes on earth. Do you guys now how many nuclear test detonations have taken place in the last 50 years? 2051!! Over 2000 explosions, including a 50 Megaton exposion in the atmosphere by the Russians, and last time I checked Earth was doing just fine......

How many of those were air blasts or underground blasts, and how many of those were actually thermonuclear? Imagine if each of those explosions had been at ground level in a different city; we'd be living in nuclear winter right now. Obviously, when you test the weapon you test it to do the least damage to the area (so you blow it up high in the air or underground, in the desert, whatever..). However, when you want to blow up a city, you blow the nuke up close to the ground so the blast sucks up all the debris and spreads it as radioactive fallout and killing far more people than an air blast would (although an air blast will travel farther).

Now, I wouldn't say one sub has the power to kill all life either.. but I'm sure it could kill tens of millions depending on how much fallout and which cities are hit.

 

[dighn]

Originally posted by: Brutuskend
We are the ONLY country to have ever used them, and yet the poll shows most people think WE should have them and no one else!!??

Don't get me wrong, I think over all lives were SAFED by us having used them, but STILL?!!

it's very simple, most ppl here are americans. of course they trust their own country and not countries that are not close allies

 

[FoBoT]

Originally posted by: NeoPTLD
I think nuclear weapons, along with all weapons of mass destruction should be phased out internationally.

won't happen, post your next dream/fantasy

 

[dighn]

Originally posted by: FoBoT

Originally posted by: NeoPTLD
I think nuclear weapons, along with all weapons of mass destruction should be phased out internationally.

won't happen, post your next dream/fantasy

yeah, at least not in the near future. we are just gonna come up with dealier weaponsof mass destruction

but we can always dream... maybe in a few hundred years..

 

[Czar]

scary results

 

[NeoPTLD]

Originally posted by: Czar
scary results

I'm surprised at people who voted nobody should be allowed to have nuke, but US can have them.

 

[So]

Originally posted by: NeoPTLD

Originally posted by: Czar
scary results

I'm surprised at people who voted nobody should be allowed to have nuke, but US can have them.

Not really. I think my reasoning in my earlier post isn't too illogical. The US and UK, as well as a few other European nations are stable enough to handle it (yes, even, [gasp!] France). I think there are a number of nations around the world whose posession of nukes wouldn't trouble me too much (i.e. Japan, perhaps) but Proliferation is always bad. The less nations with nukes the better, I think that it is clear that neither the US or UK would never use them (in the future) unless facing imminent defeat at the hands of an invasion force. I feel confidant that we aren't going to use them for evil, so I think that the world would be well off it the US had a nuclear monopoly again (notice, we had one back in the late forties, and we began to dismantle our massive military, not prepare to invade the poor defenseless outside world)