By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics - is there any point in having nuclear weapons anymore?

 

Is there any point in having nuclear weapons anymore?

Yes 12 20.34%
 
No 14 23.73%
 
I don't know 1 1.69%
 
Yes, For Security reasons 5 8.47%
 
Maybe 0 0%
 
Yes, to prevent war 27 45.76%
 
Total:59
dsgrue3 on 26 January 2013

North Korea sure seems to think there's a point.



Around the Network
Soleron on 26 January 2013
MoHasanie said:
I've always wondered if tensions really increased, could India or Pakistan use them against each other, or Israel on Iran?

The most likely use is if Pakistan falls to extremist groups and they gain control of the launch codes. I don't think any established state is stupid enough to fire (look at all the near misses Russia had, like the detectors accidentally showing incoming US missiles, and they never even came close), especially not India or Israel who have a large investment in peace and good foreign relations.



SwansVanTerif on 26 January 2013

Anyone who is scared of the North Korean or Iranian nuclear "threat", is nothing but a sheep and a tool of propaganda. The reason they want you to fear these eeeevil countries, is because their leaders aren't puppets to the western regime. That's all it takes for you to get murdered, by our glorious "democracys".



Player1x3 on 26 January 2013
Lafiel said:
no we need more nukes, because what's the only thing that can stop a bad guy with a nuke? right, a good guy with a nuke


It's funny because it's true.



MoHasanie on 27 January 2013
Soleron said:
MoHasanie said:
I've always wondered if tensions really increased, could India or Pakistan use them against each other, or Israel on Iran?

The most likely use is if Pakistan falls to extremist groups and they gain control of the launch codes. I don't think any established state is stupid enough to fire (look at all the near misses Russia had, like the detectors accidentally showing incoming US missiles, and they never even came close), especially not India or Israel who have a large investment in peace and good foreign relations.


Yeah I agree, but I think you're incorrect about Israel being peaceful. If they felt threatened enough by Iran, they could attack them right away. I think I remember reading a report from last year, where the Priminister of Israel, Benjamin Netemyahu had ordered missiles to attack Iran's nucleur plants, but the Head of defense said no, so clearly they are willing and ready to attack any time. 



    

NNID: FrequentFlyer54

Around the Network
bertlsenix on 27 January 2013
SwansVanTerif said:
Anyone who is scared of the North Korean or Iranian nuclear "threat", is nothing but a sheep and a tool of propaganda. The reason they want you to fear these eeeevil countries, is because their leaders aren't puppets to the western regime. That's all it takes for you to get murdered, by our glorious "democracys".


Pretty much this.
And especially in the USA you don't get the complete story - You always get the truth the US Government wants to tell their people.


If a fairy would come and you could wish that every nuke and way to build them are gone > Then yes.
Otherwise no - No one would really destroy them completely.They all would say they did it and would have a few stored.
Then they would test out how far they can go.Cause some countries still have oil and need to learn the way of democracy.
And thats the reason no one would do that > There is no trust.Just imagine someone would really throw their arsenal completely away.They would get invaded in the same year.Just imagine the USA would really give them up - I wouldn't want to live in that country(if i would) anymore cause you can be pretty sure some countries would lose all their fear of insane counter attacks.And a lot of other countries are under protection of them too.You can't afford to give up the biggest threat to others if they can't be trusted either.



Mr Puggsly on 27 January 2013
ps3-sales! said:
Bragging rights for incompetent people that rely on brute strength and destruction to convey their messages.

In other words, no.

You're right, it's to convey a message. And that message is leave us the fuck alone.



Recently Completed: 
River City: Rival Showdown for 3DS (3/5) - River City: Tokyo Rumble for 3DS (4/5) - Zelda: BotW for Wii U (5/5) - Zelda: BotW for Switch (5/5) - Zelda: Link's Awakening for Switch (4/5) - Rage 2 for X1X (4/5) - Rage for 360 (3/5) - Streets of Rage 4 for X1/PC (4/5) - Gears 5 for X1X (5/5) - Mortal Kombat 11 for X1X (5/5) - Doom 64 for N64 (emulator) (3/5) - Crackdown 3 for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

Farsala on 27 January 2013

Well apparently nukes can be used to save lives, including the enemies. I do not think wars should happen anyways as 1000 bombs> 1 nuke in terms of how many lives are lost. But nukes have such a bad rap that it would never be used this way.



sethnintendo on 27 January 2013

Yes, so Skynet can launch them.



kain_kusanagi on 27 January 2013

Mutual Assured Destruction

You wouldn't dare!