Nuclear War?! Right now?
- Thread starter Josep
- Start date
2fast4u said:
No, not really but I enjoy spending christmas with friends and family, I am certain that you share the same belief. Christmas isn't about religion or Santa Claus, it's about having a good time.
Nuclear weapons were discovered by mistake, and the capital reason for why the allies developed nuclear weapons was to beat the Nazi's to it. Adolf Hitler, not him personally, started the research on nuclear power and weapons long before the allies did, however most of the scientist involved in the project exchanged their freedom agaist their knowledge.
The cold war was a political, techical and economical war, it had nothing to do with them actually beating the crap out of eachother. Sovjet, which later on became Russia were at that time a superpower, still is in some aspects, with a political belief - communism most people don't share. Decades after WWII America and Russia were the only true superpowers, which is good for balance, good - evil, yin - yang..., but bad for overall influence. Someone discovered that they could force the Commis and Russia to poverty by fooling them into believing that the Americans had more weapons and tecnology in construction then they did, and it worked. You are a fool if you truly believe that poeple and goverments are taking the threat of nuclear war less serious now compared to twenty years ago, if no one fears them, why have them...
Most of the tecnology used in our everyday products, i.e computers, are a direct result from the cold war. There was a need for it, and it was developed for other purposes then letting some communist kid showing his stupidity to the world online.
It amuses me that people on a Nintendo 64 oriantated forum can't see the humor in the following quote...Just because it doesn't have the obligatory
...They have granted him free hands against terrorism, I am not sure but I have a feeling that it doesn't include the use of nuclear weapons.
hear hear, then tell me: who - in ur opinion - HAS a reason to keep nuclear weapons??
The United states of America has cleary a need for nuclear weapons, since religions idiots in other countries insists on having them. If the US doesn't need weapons, please do tell me which country out of the following that does...
Iraq, so that they can ignore their own population, two million children has died since it became known that Iraq had access to nuclear weapons. Well, you might say that the US is responsible for their deaths. Because they are the ones counterworking Iraq's attempts to trade.
If Iraq were to destory or give upp their nuclear weapons the trade block would be liften or atleast modified, the same goes for Pakistan, India, China, Corea...
It was a joke, but the meaning behind it is still true, they are spending their people's money on warfare tecnology neglecting their peoples needs....
every day u find more reasons to trust the us, eh??
I can't, I glued them together the other day when I was bored...
There isn't a threat, just because President Bush likes his...well cooked...I fail to see the reason for why he should microwave an entire country, not to say an entire continent. And once again, nuclear weapons are used to give a deeper meanings to threats... If you were to threaten me, real life that is, I would probaly lay down on the floor lauging...But if you had a couple of friends with you the threat would be taken much more seriously from my side... And how can any of you estimate how many nuclear missiles it would take to destory a country or a continent... Do you have any facts to back that up?
Last edited:
Slougi said:
...they have nuclear weapons, even a small country as Sweden has the tecnology needed to develop nuclear weapons, I wouldn't be surprised if that also goes for Finland, but both countries lacks use and motive, and more importantly support from the people, for nuclear weapons.
sk8bloke22
roll for life
the effects of a nuclear war will be devasting. bush adminstration has started something ridiculous. even the mention of attacking iraq is so dangerous, imagine wat sadam is preparing to counter, i doubt he's gonna sit and the usa bomb the fuck out of him. instead of going on this rampage, why doesnt bush intervene with israeli/palestinian crisis...something which is presently out of control, rather than starting a new violent crisis. i know one reason...oil. the usa wont intervene, as the middle-east is rich in oil, and the USA dont want to ruin there links there, as that means money will be lost. when it comes down to it, these wars are all about oil...look at the gulf, a pointless crisis, in which millions died over oil. of course there are other factors, but im finding it real scary how Bush wants to start another cold war. its great to know our lives are in safe hands ??? :hrm:
pj64er
PJ64 Lubba
Slougi said:
more countries hav nukes than u think. officially, there are only around 5-10 nuclear powers. since USSR's fall, many of its nukes have been smuggled to other countries. And if u think that at one point in the Cold War, even Canada had nukes, it is very possible that many countries that are "researching" or "hav tech to build but didnt make" do hav their own secret stockpile.
sk8bloke22
roll for life
flow`` said:
although im not a huge clinton fan, i definitely agree with u. at least he knew wat he was doing, or at least looked like he knew wat he was doing (especially with Momica Lewinski
) - bush is just ridiculous.
OP
Josep
eyerun4phun
- Thread Starter
- #29
Damn, almost losing the thread i started The bush admin. is complete b.s. though, and sadly not many people know reasons of why. Anyone know what the kyoto protocol is? Off the top of your heads, i doubt anyone in here knows, and hence reflects how much people know about the Bush Admin. Its a sad and vicious loop and sadly everyone that isn't involved in some big business, or if they are not in the Government for the U.S., then they are screwed(I.E. Everyone reading this most likely) WHY DID i want Nadar to win!? hehe, however you spell his name, because he was all for the E.P.A., environmental protection agency. This actually ties in with the whole Nuclear weapons thing, sadly if i kept explaining it, it would make less and less sense to everyone that does not understand the environmental problems that the world is in right now, but hell if anyone does know, feel free to cue in
The bush admin. is complete b.s. though, and sadly not many people know reasons of why. Anyone know what the kyoto protocol is? Off the top of your heads, i doubt anyone in here knows, and hence reflects how much people know about the Bush Admin. Its a sad and vicious loop and sadly everyone that isn't involved in some big business, or if they are not in the Government for the U.S., then they are screwed(I.E. Everyone reading this most likely) WHY DID i want Nadar to win!? hehe, however you spell his name, because he was all for the E.P.A., environmental protection agency. This actually ties in with the whole Nuclear weapons thing, sadly if i kept explaining it, it would make less and less sense to everyone that does not understand the environmental problems that the world is in right now, but hell if anyone does know, feel free to cue in
sk8bloke22
roll for life
how can u say that...the bush adminstration does loads for the environment....look at son of star wars
i say we vote in for a pretzel to replace bush.
i say we vote in for a pretzel to replace bush.
Josep said:
This might give people an little idea what you are talking about.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/kyoto/kyotorpt.html
Sounds like a pollution control agreement to limit climate change from pollution. We definately wouldn't need to worry about this if we had nukes dropped on us.
zorbid
New member
The Kyoto protocol is an agreement between almost all countries in the world to reduce the production of CO2. This agreement is a very bad thing for the texan petrol societies, that financed Bush's campain. So the first descision he took as president was to refuse to apply the protocol.
It has nothing to do with th current nuke bomb storry...
It has nothing to do with th current nuke bomb storry...
sytaylor
Sy
Josep said:Damn, almost losing the thread i started
it was the koyoto agreement which was essentially a set of sanctions that would financially cripple the usa, completley rationing their use of oil and at a time when the country needed investment (ie the country was entering a recession around the dot com crash), he simply could not afford to risk the livleyhood of his people to make some greenpeace representatives happy
sytaylor
Sy
Azimer said:
i higyly doubt that, simply because he took some action against people who threatened his peoples livley hood (need i remember you of all the bomb threats that were given after sept 11?), does not make him someone who want sto start wars! i agree he is a little on the arrogant side, and should consider the consequences of his actions more
sytaylor
Sy
Josep said:
im sick of people saying that, god damnit, did you not notice 6000 people who were at work loose their lives? and you condemn the acton to prevent this... who moral it is i don't care, if you can stop that happening again you have my support, especially if youre not sending 75 cruise missles in the middle of nowhere in the hope of stopping bin laden and you dont kill one member of the al queada (*cough* clinton *cough*)
sytaylor
Sy
pj64er said:
i think you over estimate the contention between these two countries, vladimir putin has a nasty streak, this fella knows how to get what he wants, and right now he does NOT want a war with the usa, why do you think he agreed to stop the supply of arms to arganistan? in return media coverage of the war in chenchenya died off... coincidence?
sytaylor
Sy
2fast4u said:the problem is that in a nuclear war, there are no winners - believe me here (u too, sy!
i dont doubt that, howveer i do doubt the idea that bush will use nukes, hell people thought the usa and or russia were gonna send a nuke any day for about 20 years, and they never did... war is as much about polotics and money than it is violence, if not more