Nuclear, chemical, and bio weapons

[LordJaric]

The time has come for someone in government (any government) needs to get off there ass and say to the world it is time to disarm these weapons of mass destruction. Why?

1. There is no need for them to exist, never has never will.

2. If a terrorist gets their hands on one that means innocent people are going to die.

3. Civlians are likley to be hit in a time of war. (I think civlians should be put out of harms way during war)

4. Why do we evan need them?

I'll do it my self when i get older if no one else dose.

[K-RadPie]

At 4/12/07 07:27 PM, LordJaric wrote: I'll do it my self when i get older if no one else dose.

Lol. You keep thinkin that.

At 4/12/07 07:27 PM, LordJaric wrote: I'll do it my self when i get older if no one else dose.

My $20 says you are wrong.

[LordJaric]

I'll do it my self when i get older if no one else dose.

Lol. You keep thinkin that.

I'm vary intrested in getting in to government because thing need to be done so far no has had the guts to do It them selfs.

[TheMason]

At 4/12/07 07:27 PM, LordJaric wrote: The time has come for someone in government (any government) needs to get off there ass and say to the world it is time to disarm these weapons of mass destruction. Why?

I'll do it my self when i get older if no one else dose.

First it is called the NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty) which addresses the issue of non-nuclear countries developing nuclear weapons. However, countries like N. Korea have decided to pull out of the treaty and go "rogue" and develop them anyway. So what would you suggest? Military invasion or continue to bribe him to not build another bomb?

Secondly, the US has signed treaties (and has actually complied with them) bans on developing anymore Biological weapons. The US military has, since WWII, felt that they are ineffective and useless in terms of combat.

Finally, the Geneva Conventions hold that Chemical weapons are illegal to use in war (with the exception of non-lethal chemicals such as tear-gas).

The problem is with rogue regimes who do not care for diplomacy...so what would you suggest?

[SolInvictus]

At 4/12/07 07:27 PM, LordJaric wrote: The time has come for someone in government (any government) needs to get off there ass and say to the world it is time to disarm these weapons of mass destruction. Why?

i hope you know that;
1. their production and use are banned.
2. you can't just throw these things or their components away.

[LordJaric]

What i am say is all of these weapons that curretly exisit in world. That means usa, great britan, france, russia, ext. need to get rid of them so there is 0 in the world.

[SolInvictus]

At 4/12/07 08:10 PM, LordJaric wrote: What i am say is all of these weapons that curretly exisit in world. That means usa, great britan, france, russia, ext. need to get rid of them so there is 0 in the world.

have fun wasting your money so that the materials used in the weapons are only slightly less dangerous when you throw them away.

[LordJaric]

have fun wasting your money so that the materials used in the weapons are only slightly less dangerous when you throw them away.

Well of course we would need to be carful with the materials! We could put them in well sealed underground bunckers and keep them guarded so no one gets there hands on them and makes there own bomb.

[poxpower]

At 4/12/07 08:10 PM, LordJaric wrote: What i am say is all of these weapons that curretly exisit in world. That means usa, great britan, france, russia, ext. need to get rid of them so there is 0 in the world.

Ok imagine we're 3 people, and in the center of us, there's a huge barrel of cash.
We each have a loaded gun. You say "hey let's all get rid of the guns and split the cash".

What do you think will happen if you get rid of your gun? Maybe nothing. Maybe everyone will drop the guns and you will split the cash. Maybe you'll get kicked out and will have none of the cash. Maybe you'll get a little cash. Maybe the two with guns will just shoot you.

Who'd be stupid enough to get rid of his nukes first??? As long as there's "enemy" countries in th world, we can't get rid of the nukes, even if getting rid of ALL the nukes is strictly better than us all having tons of nukes.
We just can't magically make all the nukes dissappear at once, nor can we make sure countries actually don't have nukes anymore.

[Dr-Worm]

I wish we could, but unless everyone, and that's EVERYONE, does it at the same time, we'd be left vulnerable. We'd already be nuked by now if certain other countries didn't know that we could turn their entire country into a smoldering crater. But yeah, the world would be a much, much, much better place without these weapons.

[SolInvictus]

At 4/12/07 08:24 PM, LordJaric wrote: Well of course we would need to be carful with the materials! We could put them in well sealed underground bunckers and keep them guarded so no one gets there hands on them and makes there own bomb.

well you've got it all figured out haven't you?
of course they aren't safely stored right now, no not at all. and making a new well to simply store them will solve absolutley everyhing. (sarcasm)

[SyntheticTacos]

We need nuclear weapons because the science exists and other people have them. If all the good guys get rid of their weapons and bad guys manage to develop them, then we lose MAD and the bad guys have effective control. The main point of having nuclear weapons is keeping other people who have nuclear weapons in check. The second reason for having them is because in a room where most people just have spears they'll usually listen to the guys with the flamethrowers. Bad analogy or not, there are definitely some countries we don't want to develop nuclear weapons after we've thrown out ours.

Also, we need them for when the robot revolution comes.

[LordJaric]

At 4/12/07 08:59 PM, SyntheticTacos wrote: Also, we need them for when the robot revolution comes.

What?

[SyntheticTacos]

At 4/12/07 09:22 PM, LordJaric wrote:

At 4/12/07 08:59 PM, SyntheticTacos wrote: Also, we need them for when the robot revolution comes.

What?

Kidding.

[troubles1]

ok you get the rest of the world to disarm, then make sure that there is complete peace in the world, then get back to America giving up our weapons.

[EndGameOmega]

At 4/12/07 07:27 PM, LordJaric wrote: The time has come for someone in government (any government) needs to get off there ass and say to the world it is time to disarm these weapons of mass destruction. Why?

There are many people in government who do try to do this. Try looking some of them up.

1. There is no need for them to exist, never has never will.

But there are reasons, the main one being there on hell of a deterrent from any other countries attacking ether us or our allies with there own WMDs.

2. If a terrorist gets their hands on one that means innocent people are going to die.

And how are they going to get there hands on one? I don't think you fully Belize just how big even a small nuke is. It's not like you can just fit it into a briefcase and walk away with it most are the size of a small truck.

3. Civlians are likley to be hit in a time of war. (I think civlians should be put out of harms way during war)

Even with out nukes this is still a likely possibility. As the saying goes shit happens, it sucks, it's awful, and it it should definitely be minimized, but no matter what you do it's still going to happen.

4. Why do we evan need them?

To keep others from threating us with there own, and as a last ditch first strike weapon in the case of a possibly overwhelming hostile force.

I'll do it my self when i get older if no one else dose.

I'd really like to know how.

At 4/12/07 08:10 PM, LordJaric wrote: What i am say is all of these weapons that curretly exisit in world. That means usa, great britan, france, russia, ext. need to get rid of them so there is 0 in the world.

How do you propose we do thins? Petition the russan government to get ride of theres?

At 4/12/07 08:24 PM, LordJaric wrote:
Well of course we would need to be carful with the materials! We could put them in well sealed underground bunckers and keep them guarded so no one gets there hands on them and makes there own bomb.

And what about countries refining there own materials to make them? The basic principle of enrichment isn't all that difficult, just lengthy. You can never stop them from making bombs if they so chose, see North Korea, or Pakistan or China.

Additionally I think your over blowing the nuclear issue. As I said a per paragraphs up, nukes aren,'t exactly small little things. The technology to make even a relatively small nuke, say like something that could be fitted to an ICBM, is far beyond most countries capabilities, even India which has a some what descent rocketry program would have some difficulty making anything that could be launched like an ICBM.

I'll do it my self when i get older if no one else dose.

[SgtSmiley]

wow, revolutionary idea. war without civillian casulties. aint gonna happen.

[Cheekyvincent]

weapons are cool thats y

[Paradigms]

At 4/12/07 07:27 PM, LordJaric wrote: The time has come for someone in government (any government) needs to get off there ass and say to the world it is time to disarm these weapons of mass destruction. Why?

1. There is no need for them to exist, never has never will.

There was... World War 2 and we might need them in the future...

2. If a terrorist gets their hands on one that means innocent people are going to die.

Thats why they are stored in underground bases!

3. Civlians are likley to be hit in a time of war. (I think civlians should be put out of harms way during war)

lol, When was a war fought in a village? Unless necessary

4. Why do we even need them?

Nuclear deterrence so we won't get attacked, yay Trident!

[LordJaric]

1. There is no need for them to exist, never has never will.

There was... World War 2 and we might need them in the future...

2. If a terrorist gets their hands on one that means innocent people are going to die.

Thats why they are stored in underground bases!

Alright i get the idea that this was a bad post but for you fist two anserwers.

1. IF my information is correct from my history report last year the Japanesse government wanted to surrender but they wanted a conditional surrender and our government want an unconditional sureender. Besides I never liked the fact that we droped them on civian cities.

2. All it takes is a corrupt people with high positions in the govenment or military. Like in Russia there is a gourp called the Red Mafia and there are some corrupt people in the govenment conected to them.

[PhychWard]

Nuclear, Bio, and Chemical weapons are just three ways of saying how are we gonna kill ourselves. We don't need those things to survive. Its called manual labor. Electronics, factorys and all that Required stuff is just luxcury. If people just got up and walked to work across the street they would have a better health. I don't beleive in global warning, but I do beleive in manual labor.

[LordJaric]

At 4/14/07 03:57 PM, PhychWard wrote: I don't beleive in global warning, but I do beleive in manual labor.

What, global warming does exist, ice caps melting, temp. changeing around the world, and stronger storms.

[Memorize]

At 4/14/07 04:02 PM, LordJaric wrote:

What, global warming does exist, ice caps melting, temp. changeing around the world, and stronger storms.

Whereas Climatologists (people whose job is to study climate) say that this is a natural weather cycle.

[SgtSmiley]

At 4/14/07 04:02 PM, LordJaric wrote:

What, global warming does exist, ice caps melting, temp. changeing around the world, and stronger storms.

Yeah, politicians know much better than college professors and climatologists around the world saying its natural. How do you explain how there was ten times as much CO2 in the atmosphere in the past?

[PhychWard]

At 4/14/07 04:05 PM, Memorize wrote: Whereas Climatologists (people whose job is to study climate) say that this is a natural weather cycle.

That is true because this has happened before. I have seen charts from Climatologists that say this has happened many times before.

[Kev-o]

At 4/12/07 08:04 PM, TheMason wrote:

:: Finally, the Geneva Conventions hold that Chemical weapons are illegal to use in war (with the exception of non-lethal chemicals such as tear-gas).

What about depleted uranium?