It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by wolf241e
Wow, what a number!
I guess that I shouldn't be surprised that this number is so big. Its just when reading the raw numbers like this makes me wonder why we have so many of these damn things in the first place.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for being armed to the teeth. I do however question the need for maintaining some 9,600 of these things, according to the article, when surely 5,000 could do the job (many times over).
It makes me wonder if, by maintaining them, it is cheaper than getting rid of them??
Anyone know?
rawstory.com
(visit the link for the full news article)
Originally posted by wolf241e
Wow, what a number!
I guess that I shouldn't be surprised that this number is so big. Its just when reading the raw numbers like this makes me wonder why we have so many of these damn things in the first place.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for being armed to the teeth. I do however question the need for maintaining some 9,600 of these things, according to the article, when surely 5,000 could do the job (many times over).
It makes me wonder if, by maintaining them, it is cheaper than getting rid of them??
Anyone know?
rawstory.com
(visit the link for the full news article)
Originally posted by burdman30ott6
reply to post by MischeviousElf
3. 2 or 3 nukes wouldn't obliterate any country, friend. Barring the use of something like the Tsar bomb or our (never proven to exist) planet killer missle that theorhetically delivers a destructive blast thousands of times stronger than Hiroshima, it would take several nukes to destroy a single large city. 2 or 3 detonated anywhere would be horrific, absolutely, but they wouldn't result in destruction of a nation.
Originally posted by burdman30ott6
reply to post by MischeviousElf
Wow, where to start?
1. Why is "ending worl hunger and starvation" my country's responsibillity?
I could just as easily start ripping on Canada for spending money to socialize health care, or on art endowments, or the UK on whatever it is the UK spends their money on.
Where do you stop? Yeah, starving kids in Africa, sucks huh? Still, not my concern. Keeping MY country safe, however... very important to me.
2. The mere fact that we have an arsenal which could end all life on Earth as we know it with a simple series of button presses is what has kept this country basically safe from rogue governments.
I do not lose sleep over asshats like Castro or Chavez having nukes. I don't actually worry about Ahmadinejad or Jong Ill having nukes.
These are all men who wallow in affluence, greed, and hedonism.
They love life, and have no desire to see their own lives ended in a firestorm. That is the advantage having the largest nuclear arsenal in the world grants the US.
Every government around the entire globe knows without a doubt that the instant a mushroom cloud appears over New York City, Los Angeles, Washington DC, or any other series of major US cities, it will equal end game for everyone.
I do, however, worry about religious fanatics getting ahold of nukes because they have demonstrated that one of their goals is martyrdom and destruction. But that's for another topic...
3. 2 or 3 nukes wouldn't obliterate any country, friend. Barring the use of something like the Tsar bomb or our (never proven to exist) planet killer missle that theorhetically delivers a destructive blast thousands of times stronger than Hiroshima, it would take several nukes to destroy a single large city. 2 or 3 detonated anywhere would be horrific, absolutely, but they wouldn't result in destruction of a nation.
To the OP, the article is slightly misleading. Technically speaking, the money spent of missle defense & on threat reduction could be considered part of preparing for a nuclear attack.
I'm pleased to see that they are spending far more on preparing to deflect or eliminate an attack before the payload reaches our country than they are on actually dealing with the aftermath of a detonation. If those figures were reversed, I'd tend to believe that we were expecting a successfully attack rather than expecting to be able to defend ourselves from it.