Nuclear weapons
- jester2000
-
jester2000
- Member since: Nov. 15, 2006
- Offline.
-
- Forum Stats
- Member
- Level 19
- Blank Slate
So Nuke's... I think the United States will shoot first if North Korea keeps up there test but that wood be bad for the hole world peopel are geting mad at the U.S. for the past I dont think the past is that inportant it's now we shold be thinking about I will back the U.S. cause I'am in Canada.
- UWDarDar17
-
UWDarDar17
- Member since: Jan. 11, 2007
- Offline.
-
- Forum Stats
- Member
- Level 09
- Blank Slate
First, why the funky picture?
Second, the U.S. will never strike first with nuclear weapons (at least of the non-strategic kind). Ever. That would be an absolutely foolish and utterly catastrophic move. Most of our spending on nukes are of the defensive variety anyway. We spend a lot of money on missile defense systems.
- ErwinR0mmel
-
ErwinR0mmel
- Member since: Apr. 2, 2005
- Offline.
-
- Forum Stats
- Member
- Level 23
- Blank Slate
At 6/4/07 06:09 PM, jester2000 wrote: So Nuke's... I think the United States will shoot first if North Korea keeps up there test but that wood be bad for the hole world peopel are geting mad at the U.S. for the past I dont think the past is that inportant it's now we shold be thinking about I will back the U.S. cause I'am in Canada.
Are you trying to write in Canadian? I never knew that was possible!
To the matter at hand. I think there has been an agreement on the N Korean nukes among all the major parties... Kim Jong got what he wanted... attention from the world.
- EndGameOmega
-
EndGameOmega
- Member since: Dec. 10, 2006
- Offline.
-
- Forum Stats
- Member
- Level 09
- Blank Slate
At 6/4/07 06:09 PM, jester2000 wrote: So Nuke's... I think the United States will shoot first if North Korea keeps up there test but that wood be bad for the hole world peopel are geting mad at the U.S. for the past I dont think the past is that inportant it's now we shold be thinking about I will back the U.S. cause I'am in Canada.
We won't. First of North Korea is a peon, they don't have any real power, and a couple of underpowered A-bombs won't change that. If we where to attack them (not very likely) we wouldn't use nukes, but rather conventional, and precision weaponry.
At 6/4/07 06:11 PM, UWDarDar17 wrote:
Most of our spending on nukes are of the defensive variety anyway.
No, most of our nukes are not defensive. I question weather there is such a thing when dealing with a nuclear arsenal; of course I am ignoring the deterrent factor they produce. I think what your trying to refer to are tactical vs strategic, at which point most of our arsenal would be strategic (obviously non defensive) in nature.
If you have a -10% chance of succeeding, not only will you fail every time you make an attempt, you will also fail 1 in 10 times that you don't even try.
- Dr-Worm
-
Dr-Worm
- Member since: Apr. 26, 2004
- Offline.
-
- Forum Stats
- Member
- Level 08
- Movie Buff
Nah, we'd never strike with nukes first. It's much too serious, and we aren't going to be provoked by a freaky little madman who's all talk.
The only real threat I see in the near future is Russia, and the outcome on that all depends on where our frenemy China sees their alliegances.
...but the next big thing in U.S. war is gonna be Iran. It's like Iranian politicians work on nothing but pissing off America.
- jester2000
-
jester2000
- Member since: Nov. 15, 2006
- Offline.
-
- Forum Stats
- Member
- Level 19
- Blank Slate
First the pic kicks ass cause I'am Jester2000 Ahhhhhhh HAHAHA! sorry O ya I dont think the U.S. will attack first I think Korea or Japan mite you know Japan the Atomic-bomb thay got fucked and pissed way off and you can't just hope the M D S works so what is new with Russia that could be a quagmire of the future. Thier's one good thing about war the technology that follows I love it!
- Cobra82
-
Cobra82
- Member since: Feb. 28, 2005
- Offline.
-
- Forum Stats
- Member
- Level 16
- Blank Slate
No, most of our nukes are not defensive. I question weather there is such a thing when dealing with a nuclear arsenal; of course I am ignoring the deterrent factor they produce. I think what your trying to refer to are tactical vs strategic, at which point most of our arsenal would be strategic (obviously non defensive) in nature.
I have to argue with you, because all of our military is made for defensive-offensive strikes! now if you dont know what that means then here ya go, all of our arsenials are made to hold the defensive which could be viewed as strategic but basically its defensive and then when thats estabolished we move our defensive positions into defensive-offensive meaning we are safe or well relatively safe from opposition while still pumping out the offense.
And we do spend more of our money on actually getting rid of our nukes now then making them, they are leaking and we have more then we need. plus we do spend on nucleur defenses, trying to make it so we have an early detection so if the nuke is high above atmosphere we can try and detonate it in air and hope the fall out afterward isnt as bad as if it hit on ground.
- troubles1
-
troubles1
- Member since: Apr. 3, 2006
- Offline.
-
- Forum Stats
- Member
- Level 21
- Blank Slate
At 6/4/07 08:54 PM, jester2000 wrote: First the pic kicks ass cause I'am Jester2000 Ahhhhhhh HAHAHA! sorry O ya I dont think the U.S. will attack first I think Korea or Japan mite you know Japan the Atomic-bomb thay got fucked and pissed way off and you can't just hope the M D S works so what is new with Russia that could be a quagmire of the future. Thier's one good thing about war the technology that follows I love it!
WHAT , I would explain how wrong you are but I think you are just posting to show off your pictures.
- Jaketheclonetrooper
-
Jaketheclonetrooper
- Member since: Mar. 23, 2006
- Offline.
-
- Forum Stats
- Member
- Level 09
- Blank Slate
At 6/4/07 08:54 PM, jester2000 wrote: First the pic kicks ass cause I'am Jester2000 Ahhhhhhh HAHAHA! sorry O ya I dont think the U.S. will attack first I think Korea or Japan mite you know Japan the Atomic-bomb thay got fucked and pissed way off and you can't just hope the M D S works so what is new with Russia that could be a quagmire of the future. Thier's one good thing about war the technology that follows I love it!
LOL at the fact that you said Japan will nuke the US becuase 'they were pissed". Oh, so what will that do? Oh, I know, send even more nukes to japan. Yay!
Stop picture spamming, dumbass.
- LegendaryLukus
-
LegendaryLukus
- Member since: Apr. 16, 2005
- Offline.
-
- Forum Stats
- Member
- Level 15
- Blank Slate
At 6/4/07 06:09 PM, jester2000 wrote: So Nuke's... I think the United States will shoot first if North Korea keeps up there test but that wood be bad for the hole world peopel are geting mad at the U.S. for the past I dont think the past is that inportant it's now we shold be thinking about I will back the U.S. cause I'am in Canada.
Can I buy some pot from you?
Up the Clarets!
- ultrabitch
-
ultrabitch
- Member since: Nov. 22, 2004
- Offline.
-
- Forum Stats
- Member
- Level 13
- Blank Slate
The first person to strike with nukes will be wiped off the map by the counterstrike.
Unless they have anti-nuke defences like America has.
And the ones America is trying to build in Europe to defend from North Korea, resulting in Russia's PM getting pissed off at the USA and telling us he'll point missiles at EUROPE'S major cities if America puts an anti-missile defence system on his doorstep.
I don't blame him for feeling uncomfortable. Although I won't say I'm happy about his threat, and Bush's reaction being "You're not helping" wasn't helpful either.
People seem to have forgotten that America is the FIRST AND ONLY country to ever use nukes in action, rather than tests. Oh, and no Japanese delegates were invited to watch the test in the Nevada Desert.
- jester2000
-
jester2000
- Member since: Nov. 15, 2006
- Offline.
-
- Forum Stats
- Member
- Level 19
- Blank Slate
So you all like my pic. Defensive NUKE'S ha I like that it has a kick to it back up ha ha ha........ Well I think T3 will happen in ten years or so and that M D S nice eat your heart out Russia dont get mad Just sit and do nothing at all good Russia. O and weed the best in town ha ha ha!
- LordJaric
-
LordJaric
- Member since: Apr. 11, 2007
- Offline.
-
- Forum Stats
- Member
- Level 16
- Blank Slate
At 6/6/07 12:23 AM, jester2000 wrote: So you all like my pic.
You picture is vary stupid.
Common sense isn't so common anymore
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants"
Fanfiction Page
- jester2000
-
jester2000
- Member since: Nov. 15, 2006
- Offline.
-
- Forum Stats
- Member
- Level 19
- Blank Slate
At 6/6/07 12:23 AM, LordJaric wrote:At 6/6/07 12:23 AM, jester2000 wrote: So you all like my pic.You picture is vary stupid.
Ha HA HA HA HA All you have to say is you pictue is vary stupid HaHaHaHaHa ya.
- ForkRobotik
-
ForkRobotik
- Member since: Mar. 25, 2007
- Offline.
-
- Forum Stats
- Member
- Level 13
- Blank Slate
At 6/5/07 09:44 AM, ultrabitch wrote: And the ones America is trying to build in Europe to defend from North Korea, resulting in Russia's PM getting pissed off at the USA and telling us he'll point missiles at EUROPE'S major cities if America puts an anti-missile defence system on his doorstep.
Actually, the american claims are to defend against rogue states like N.Korea and Iran. While Korea has nukes, they would never use them, except as leverage. They don't have the missile technology to get a rocket to europe either, infact one of the things on their begging list to the west is to send up some satellites for them.
Iran whose entire economy depends on Europe doesn't have the missile tech or the nuclear tech to attack europe.
Russia knows the Iran isn't about to attack anyone, and Korea would never try to send anything over China/Russia, because they(they as in China and Russia) would quickly eliminate the regime there. What else is Russia supposed to think about the deployment? This is an aggressive move by the USA, and it's pissing off Russia to no end.
- LordJaric
-
LordJaric
- Member since: Apr. 11, 2007
- Offline.
-
- Forum Stats
- Member
- Level 16
- Blank Slate
At 6/6/07 12:39 AM, jester2000 wrote:At 6/6/07 12:23 AM, LordJaric wrote:Ha HA HA HA HA All you have to say is you pictue is vary stupid HaHaHaHaHa ya.At 6/6/07 12:23 AM, jester2000 wrote: So you all like my pic.You picture is vary stupid.
and it is gay.
Common sense isn't so common anymore
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants"
Fanfiction Page
- ultrabitch
-
ultrabitch
- Member since: Nov. 22, 2004
- Offline.
-
- Forum Stats
- Member
- Level 13
- Blank Slate
Yeah, they'd just march on in wouldn't they? Those seas in the way, and all that airspace and all those WMD that aren't Nukes... they don't mean SHIT to the evil Commies living in the Soviet.
If Russians actually invaded American soil (Har har), nukes, which destroy everything and fucking EVERYTHING wouldn't be much use to defend yourselves.
- ultrabitch
-
ultrabitch
- Member since: Nov. 22, 2004
- Offline.
-
- Forum Stats
- Member
- Level 13
- Blank Slate
Nukes are only a defence against other nukes. And you can only defend yourself by not using them.
As if America doesn't already have those illiegal anti-nuke bombs that would shoot down nukes in the air so that they could bomb other nuke countries anyway and be fine...
- K-RadPie
-
K-RadPie
- Member since: Jan. 5, 2005
- Offline.
-
- Forum Stats
- Member
- Level 09
- Blank Slate
At 6/7/07 02:17 PM, ultrabitch wrote:
As if America doesn't already have those illiegal anti-nuke bombs that would shoot down nukes in the air so that they could bomb other nuke countries anyway and be fine...
Anti-nuke technology is NOT illegal, what the fuck are you smokin'?
- ultrabitch
-
ultrabitch
- Member since: Nov. 22, 2004
- Offline.
-
- Forum Stats
- Member
- Level 13
- Blank Slate
Okay, illiegal is the wrong word.
The UN made a bill thing that countries would sign promising that they wouldn't have anti-nuke missiles. America never signed it.
- emmytee
-
emmytee
- Member since: Jun. 16, 2006
- Offline.
-
- Forum Stats
- Member
- Level 02
- Blank Slate
At 6/5/07 09:44 AM, ultrabitch wrote:
he'll point missiles at EUROPE'S major cities if America puts an anti-missile defence system on his doorstep.
Actually he said "then we will have new targets in Europe", which basically means your shield.
- GothKid32
-
GothKid32
- Member since: May. 23, 2007
- Offline.
-
- Forum Stats
- Member
- Level 03
- Blank Slate
Well I say fuck Putin and his shity nukes, and he's just a fucked up ex KGB comie. And his dieing wish is to use a nuclear weapon so he wont look like a fucking queer. So I say just put up the sheild and if he launces nukes. Nuke his ass back and show him what the US can do.
- CaptainChip
-
CaptainChip
- Member since: May. 24, 2007
- Offline.
-
- Forum Stats
- Member
- Level 11
- Blank Slate
Who will guard the guards guarding the guards?
World of Words 2
IF YOU NEED FLASH CARTOON IDEAS, COME SEE ME!


