Weapons of Mass Destruction and the U.S.

[Jenn]

This may be a stupid question, but I don't understand something..

How come the U.S. has a right to make all of these weapons of mass destruction, but when another country starts making them we get pissed and try to stop it?

Is it because we think they're a huge threat to us, or do we just like being the bigger, better country with bigger bombs?

These other countries see us as a threat because of what we have, they should be able to have the same, no?

And no, this isn't a thread to bash the U.S. So buddha please take it easy here.

[NeCrOmAnCeR]

The reason is you don't have to worry about the nation with 1000 nukes, as they know better than to use them. It is that lone wolf mother fucker that is just crazy enough to push the button!

[mcsmc]

^^^What he said.

MOST nations (North Korea and Iran are examples) want nukes to USE. We (the US), on the other hand, MAINTAIN nukes for STRICTLY defensive purposes. We have a very rigid policy and command structure which does NOT allow any of our nukes to be used without approval from multiple people (and on that note, if the nukes do get used, those people are the ones that will have full responsibility for the consequences).

[suki]

^^^What he said.

MOST nations (North Korea and Iran are examples) want nukes to USE. We (the US), on the other hand, MAINTAIN nukes for STRICTLY defensive purposes. We have a very rigid policy and command structure which does NOT allow any of our nukes to be used without approval from multiple people (and on that note, if the nukes do get used, those people are the ones that will have full responsibility for the consequences).



is it just me...or did you suddenly become an expert on everything over the weekend?

you're getting more and more full of shit...

and yourself.

you might wanna back off the know-it-all thing for a bit. its starting to look like a more of a permament personality fixture than a mood.


and it's sooo not cute.

[mcsmc]

is it just me...or did you suddenly become an expert on everything over the weekend?

you're getting more and more full of shit...

and yourself.

you might wanna back off the know-it-all thing for a bit. its starting to look like a more of a permament personality fixture than a mood.


and it's sooo not cute.

http://swollencranium.com/forums/showthread.php?t=266

If you want to be a cunt, pick somewhere else and quit hijacking kthnx.

[KommieKat]

^^^What he said.

MOST nations (North Korea and Iran are examples) want nukes to USE.


Each and every time these two nations agree to give up, the US fucks up.
North Korea made an agreement to end its nuclear programs in return for energy assistance. North Korea was committed to dismantle its nuclear weapons program and the US would terminate hostile gestures, provide a light-water reactor instead. This was Sept 2005.

US forced banks to freeze NK assets an terminated the talks about the light-water reactor, because the US accused NK of using banks for illegal transfers. The main bank involved, Banco Delta Asia, said there was no evidence of such activities.

Funny you never mentioned it was our country that was the first to use them.

Jenn,
We don't allow others to do so because Nukes are a deterrent a nation can use to keep us out of their country.

Bottom Line:
WHAT WE SAY GOES.

[Cúchulainn]

Because we've got the bombs, okay? Russia, Germany, Romania, they can have all the democracy they want, they can have a big democracy cake-walk right through the middle of Tienemen Square, and it ain't gonna make a lick of difference because WE'VE GOT THE BOMBS.

Denis Leary aside...

The United States is the only country who has used a nuclear weapon (or two) in times of war. Fortunately, President Truman picked a good target. Unfortunately, he didn't drop enough of 'em, that's why Buddha is still with us. Damn shame.

Personally, I don't trust these fucking psychos out there with nukes. Its just bad news. There's a lot of leaders who would use those nukes, while the U.S. won't. So who do you trust with nuclear devices? An asshole with an itchy finger and a hair trigger who wants to prove something to the U.S., or a country that refuses to use 'em at almost all costs?

[Stickman]

Well the US as far as the public knows, no longer produces nuclear weapons. So it isn't breaking any international laws. It's not just the US with nukes in it's arsenal. The UK, Russia, France, China, India, Pakistan. There's a non-proliferation treaty which most major countries in the world have signed stating that they won't make any more nukes. So as far as I know they are no longer in production just maintenance.

The reason the international community doesn't want more countries producing them is quite simple. Because the more lunatic dictators that have them in their arsenal the higher the chance one of them would be dumb enough to start a nuclear war.

[KommieKat]

Denis Leary aside...

The United States is the only country who has used a nuclear weapon (or two) in times of war. Fortunately, President Truman picked a good target. Unfortunately, he didn't drop enough of 'em, that's why Buddha is still with us. Damn shame.

Would you be so kind to explain why you mentioned me in this thread?
I was not even born yet. This is a serious question as you posted in a serious thread and sub-forum.

While you're at it, please explain as to how many more bombs should have been dropped and where. You're opinions are full of ignorance and racism.
If you can show, with sources otherwise, than I shall change my thinking about you.

Also, explain what would the motive have been in dropping so many bombs.
What makes you think the bombs that were dropped was during the war? I will expect you to back up your answer.

Have you been to Ground Zero at any of those two cities? Have you been to the museums in those two cities. I seriously doubt you would continue with your blatant racist attitude if you had.

[Jenn]

Well the US as far as the public knows, no longer produces nuclear weapons. So it isn't breaking any international laws. It's not just the US with nukes in it's arsenal. The UK, Russia, France, China, India, Pakistan. There's a non-proliferation treaty which most major countries in the world have signed stating that they won't make any more nukes. So as far as I know they are no longer in production just maintenance.

The reason the international community doesn't want more countries producing them is quite simple. Because the more lunatic dictators that have them in their arsenal the higher the chance one of them would be dumb enough to start a nuclear war.

You're right.

And the current threat of nuclear war scares the shit out of me. Why not just not have them at all? What the fuck is the big deal? Is one person stupid enough to think, "Hey, if I set one off at this country, they wont fire back?" You set one off, you're fucked too, buddy.

[Stickman]

You're right.

And the current threat of nuclear war scares the shit out of me. Why not just not have them at all? What the fuck is the big deal? Is one person stupid enough to think, "Hey, if I set one off at this country, they wont fire back?" You set one off, you're fucked too, buddy.

That's the reason to have them right there. Simply by having them the US can majorly deter any upstart nuclear power from thinking of ever setting one off. It keeps the world in it's current state of power balance (well inbalance may be a better word). If the US didn't have them and Iran made some suddenly they have a very large bargaining chip.