nukes

the americans dropped the bomb on japan 60 odd years ago, and everyone after was appauled and said never again. but i guess those poeple have died out, and all thats left is people who have forgotten history. at least then they could say" we really didnt know what would happen afterwards" but today no one can say that, ok sure maybe iran could be a threat, but if the states drops it first, then they are trully the terrorists and would deserve what ever they got in return. the problem lies in the fact i live in north america and i dont want my home,family and life distroyed because some war monger decided to start a nuclear war against a country that offers no serious military threat to me. the americans are generally innocent of this matter but if there leader is a war criminal then they will pay the price, just like the iraqi did for saddam.

Some of us remember WW2 and all that history.

I truly hope the Democrats take over congress in the next election.

Maybe that would block the NeoClowns and their destructive mid-east fantasies.

Tho I think if the NeoClowns lost control like that, al-CIAda would suddenly strike. Gotta move the citzenry into embracing the police state.. for their own good.

They're very twisted, these BushCons.

EastCoastKid you've been reading far too much biased news. It really doesn't matter who or how many of what get elected during this next go around, the U.S. isn't going to cut and run from Iraq.

As I said in another thread, the world will be P|SSED! if USA drops a nuke on the middle east. Especially after hearing that the US President declined that live debate with the Iranian president. USA will look very bad.

the americans already look bad, but if they push it too far their friends and allies might turn their backs on them, and then what? the americans are going to take on the world??! who would be the tyrant then?

I've said it before here: The next country that uses a nuclear weapon will become an instant international pariah. The unspeakable, horrific deaths of massive numbers of civilians, obliteration of vast stretches of infrastrusture, the logistical complications of getting aid to the survivors, the media images... no country will ever be able to justify the act and other countries --- no matter any stated allegiance --- will be quick to separate themselves. International isolation is a certainty. As sick as it may sound, I believe that the country that is attacked will fair far better than the attacker.

This whole issue really is moot. The U.S. isn't going to nuke Iran, not unless something catastrophic were to happen first. Catastrophic being: New York, or some other large Western city suddenly up and disappearing in a blaze of atomic fire, and all evidence pointing to Iran, like missile trajectory etc..., and since Iran doesn't pocess a delivery system, as yet, capable of reaching Europe, muchless America, the point is moot.

Should Irans endevouring to be an Atomic Power be couse for concern? Of course. Could their intentions be peaceful? Of course. Could they be hostile? Of course. Is the US just going to out of the blue drop the bomb on Iran? Of course not.

would the americans cause a plane to fly into their own building, blow it up , name a scape-goat, insite a war on multiple nations, and kill tens of thousands for oi profit. of coarse not.

Not sure whether or not you are being sarcastic or not? I tend to think not, but I don't know...

That particular conspiracy aside...please. The US is not about to launch an atomic attack on Iran, unless attacked first.

Let's assume for the moment that the gov't did indeed fly fully loaded planes into the wtc and pentagon...they didn't, but anyway...you are saying that they would attack, with atomic weaponry no less, an american city, killing not thousands, but possibly millions? If you are...wow!!!

How in the world would the evil "theys" keep that secret. Not possible...

no i am not saying they would nuke theselves, but concidering how the americans are useing depleted uranium in "normal" amunition and covering the mid east with radition- by the way have you noticed that the persian gulf sickness has the same symptoms as radition posioning? and the use of white phospherous on civlians which is a cheical weapon shows how ignorant the american military can be. and yes they will drop the bomb first, they will just try to make it look like someone else did it and give reason to continue with the war machine

Edit: nevermind, someones just said what I was going to ^

[edit on 1/9/2006 by malganis]

Arrgh...the cyber demon ate my post. It was so good too.

Why and what would the powers that be gain from doing something so utterly and irridemablyevil?Money? Most of them are wealthy beyond the dreams of avarice already. Power? the US is already the most powerful nation that has ever existed.

What is to gain here? I quite simply don't see it. If indeed that is what they are after...money wealth and power...there are easier ways to go about it, not to mention safer...

yes money and power! lets not forget conrtol as well. what they have to gain is complete and total submission of the masses. currently there are people who do not want to live the american dream, look at new orleans, i dont want that dream either. but the americans want to rule the world, but no one will entirely. so what !that they already have money? have you ever heard of greed? why do the oil barons raise the price of gas? is it because they cant pay the rent? why do the american feel the have the right to govern the world and yet not follow the same rules. coruption and tyrany have no room for logic

Now, a lot of people are going to say I read too much "mainstream media/history" if I say that the dropping of the atomic bombs on Japan actually saved hundreds of thousands of lives (Japanese civilians and both Japanese and US troops.) Two? Maybe overkill, maybe not - there's lots of speculation regarding the talks that took place between the dropping of Little Man over Hiroshima and Fat Boy over Nagasaki (or is it vice-versa? whatever...) But it was also total war back then, very much unlike today.

Additionally, the US is the least likely to use nuclear weapons against an enemy for the simple reason that we have so many more options available to us these days. And, of course, these days people tend to get upset over "civilian" casualties. It would take a major conflict against an enemy with more than a handful of nukes for them to be realistically used, imo, since the very mention of nuclear weapons sends people running for their pre-made protest signs. This is regardless of the fact that there are different variety of nukes that are much cleaner/more efficient that the ones used on Japan, depending on what the intended goal/target would be.

There is a thread similar to this on PTS.

I'll reiterate my thoughts from that thread here-

Originally posted by Reality Hurts
You have to judge this by historical example, not opinion or your feelings about America...

The US would not use nuclear weapons, not even even small tactical nukes, to prevent or destroy Iran's nuclear capability. It would not use them unless a massive non-conventional attack was used against the US.

[...snip...]

The facts illustrate that, for the last 60 years, the US ... have resisted the urge to escalate any situation by utilizing their nuclear arsenals. The US could have nuked the North Koreans in the Korean War, nuked the Viet Cong in the Vietnam War, and nuked the Republican Guard in the first or second Iraq War. They didn't.

yes but the bush family was not in power then. and dont be too quick about korea

Originally posted by doggmann
yes but the bush family was not in power then. and dont be too quick about korea

Bush family members have been elected President 3 times and haven't nuked anyone. So show me something other than speculation that a Bush is going to nuke someone.

Also, if you're trying to tell me that America nuked N. Korea during the Korean War, how about something tangible to support that.

Thanks.

ok how about the bush admin saying publicly that they are concidering a premepted nuclear attack on iran. is that tangable enough for you!
and no i didnt imply that korea was nuked before, im just sayin that its in the realm of possibility that they wuld go into a pissing contest with the states.

Originally posted by doggmann
ok how about the bush admin saying publicly that they are concidering a premepted nuclear attack on iran. is that tangable enough for you!
and no i didnt imply that korea was nuked before, im just sayin that its in the realm of possibility that they wuld go into a pissing contest with the states.

There are US plans for a pre-emptive attack on every country in the world and almost every country has plans for a pre-emptive attack on the US. There are people who's entire job is to create these plans. With all of the rhetoric being spouted off by Iran's government about nuking Israel or the US, it wouldn't suprise me if some missiles hadn't been retargeted.

Besides with weapons like the B-2 and MOAB nukes aren't really necessary any more. The only reason that Iran and North Korea want them is to be able to threaten the rest of the world. If it becomes time to take Iran out, taking a few dozen MOABs and doing a little carpet bombing with them will get the desired result.

so we should let the states be the only ones who threaten the world??