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

Forums - General - Nuclear Proliferation is not the way to go

akuma587 on 06 April 2009
FaRmLaNd said:
Why don't we have energy shields protecting out cities from nukes yet? I want answers!

We can't even afford healthcare for our citizens.  I think high level energy shields that could withstand a nuclear blast plus the residual fallout are a bit out of reach at the moment.

 



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

Around the Network
sethnintendo on 06 April 2009
akuma587 said:
FaRmLaNd said:
Why don't we have energy shields protecting out cities from nukes yet? I want answers!

We can't even afford healthcare for our citizens.  I think high level energy shields that could withstand a nuclear blast plus the residual fallout are a bit out of reach at the moment.

 

 

SDI program pretty much was a failure.  The new anti missle system works sometimes.  I think the early version during the 90s had a very bad failure rate but they have improved it.



donathos on 06 April 2009
TheRealMafoo said:
mrstickball said:
im_sneaky said:

What? USA helps people out of goodwill? That's news to me.

Your right. America should call in all of the loans & aid that it gave Europe after WW2 for the reconstruction. Adding in interest, it should fix our entire national debt.

You forgot Japan. You know, the ones that declared war on us, and then after we beat the shit out of them we rebuilt there country.

We wish the Japanese had declared war on us...

I see this anti-US thing around here a lot.  I guess it's considered an acceptable bigotry.  But calling us out on goodwill?  Okay, I say we accept that criticism, charge back all of the billions we spend annually on foreign aid, and call it a good deal; we'll let Canada pick up our humanitarian slack.

OT: The nuclear genie's out of the bottle.  I don't want North Korea to get the bomb, naturally, but apparently the UN isn't even good for a sternly worded criticism:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090406/wl_nm/us_korea_north

I think it's time for our policymakers to concede that, sooner or later, everyone who wants them is gonna have nukes; it's time to figure out how to get along in a world like that.



TheRealMafoo on 06 April 2009
akuma587 said:
FaRmLaNd said:
Why don't we have energy shields protecting out cities from nukes yet? I want answers!

We can't even afford healthcare for our citizens. I think high level energy shields that could withstand a nuclear blast plus the residual fallout are a bit out of reach at the moment.

 

 

We can't remotely afford Obama's healthcare plan, and we are doing that, so not affording it seems to not matter.

Let's build it!



Tyrannical on 06 April 2009
sethnintendo said:

SDI program pretty much was a failure.  The new anti missle system works sometimes.  I think the early version during the 90s had a very bad failure rate but they have improved it.

 

 Then they figured out how easy it was to shoot down much slower moving planes from space based lasers. But that's a secret.



Yet, today, America's leaders are reenacting every folly that brought these great powers [Russia, Germany, and Japan] to ruin -- from arrogance and hubris, to assertions of global hegemony, to imperial overstretch, to trumpeting new 'crusades,' to handing out war guarantees to regions and countries where Americans have never fought before. We are piling up the kind of commitments that produced the greatest disasters of the twentieth century.
 — Pat Buchanan – A Republic, Not an Empire

Around the Network
megaman79 on 06 April 2009

Yes it costs alot of money to maintain them , r u kidding me? Its not just cheap barb wire fences, although it is in Russia.

The more there are the greater the chance of a mistake occurring, be that through accidental firing or theft. Yea thats pretty obvious even for half of you dingbats in here.

@Real Mofo, I can't understand why your distrust of government would not lead to a distrust in their capacity to protect the US, and its allies, effectively.

Personally after studying a little about the cold war and nuclear deterence i think the use of nukes is stupid.

A theory exists that says each country (US and Russia) has the capacity to bring about total world destruction, and in fact this cancels out the very use of nukes themselves, did you ever think about that? So basically there is no point in having that many nukes, they CANNOT possibly ever be used ever. Why keep them?

Its a question of rationality i think, it is obviously irrational to have so much capacity to destroy 100 earths when this would never realistically be an option. For a sane person, and i dk whether Putin, Obama or whats his name could just flip the switch one day, the logic of this "defense" makes no sense.



“When we make some new announcement and if there is no positive initial reaction from the market, I try to think of it as a good sign because that can be interpreted as people reacting to something groundbreaking. ...if the employees were always minding themselves to do whatever the market is requiring at any moment, and if they were always focusing on something we can sell right now for the short term, it would be very limiting. We are trying to think outside the box.” - Satoru Iwata - This is why corporate multinationals will never truly understand, or risk doing, what Nintendo does.

colonelstubbs on 06 April 2009

Just abolish all nukes dammit!



I hope my 360 doesn't RRoD
         "Suck my balls!" - Tag courtesy of Fkusmot

Words Of Wisdom on 06 April 2009

How would we defeat the aliens without them?



akuma587 on 06 April 2009

Wouldn't the best first step to telling other countries to not acquire nuclear weapons be to reduce our own arsenal? Its like telling people they don't need more guns to defend themselves while they watch you stockpile guns in the process in the name of national defense.



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

TheRealMafoo on 06 April 2009
akuma587 said:
Wouldn't the best first step to telling other countries to not acquire nuclear weapons be to reduce our own arsenal? Its like telling people they don't need more guns to defend themselves while they watch you stockpile guns in the process in the name of national defense.

 

I think the issue with most Americans who think like this, is they think the world is safer then it really is.

A good analogy would be if two people who didn't like each other, and one was known to be somewhat violent.

The violent one has a baseball bat, and the less violent one has a gun and a baseball bat. If you were the guy with the gun, would you point it at the guy with the bat and tell him to put it down, or would you throw your gun away and then say "let's both now put our bats down"?

The safest bet, for your best interests, is to point the gun at him and make him. Asking him without the upper hand has a much higher probability of failure.