im_sneaky said:
TheRealMafoo said:
akuma587 said:
Even Bush's appointee to Secretary of Defense Robert Gibbs thinks the amount we were trying to spend on nuclear weapons recently was ludicrous and just plain unnecessary.
Can you blow up the world 10x over, or 20x over? That was essentially the conundrum we faced. |
I am not for wasting money, if we can destroy the world 3x over, then ok, let's stop making weapons.
But unless is cost a lot to maintain those weapons, I find no reason to get rid of the ones we have though.
|
Hopefully, in order for the US to maintain glory, freedom, property, and security, and protect us pansy nations like Canada and switzerland from the evil zerg hordes, the US doesn't need so many nukes. And you never know, maybe if someone retarded, like Palin, was president, a nuclear war would start arising from her experience with Russia, and we would use our nukes, thus ending existence. If there were, say, 95% less nukes, then moscow and ny and some others would be blown up. Peanuts, at least the people in the countryside would get to live.
|
