This is frightening

[SD Nihil]

I saw a youtube audio where Obama is talking about working with Russia to disarm our ICBMs, wants to take our early warning system off hair trigger alert, and cut funding for these types of defense systems. He wants a world without nuclear weapons. It would be great if no one had nukes in the world, but I doubt Russia nad other countries would just do that. And if we disarm first what's to stop other countries from seeing that as an oppertunity to wipe us out off the map. I don't want to die a nuclear death. I know we won't fire ours unless someone did to us. And if no one had nukes what's to stop someone from making new ones. If then someone had them and no one else did they'd have a gun pointed at the world in a sense.

 

I believe the only reason why we have our nukes and missile sheild pointed at Russia is because they have them and we want to prevent WWIII nuclear war.

 

Anyway, here's the audio: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8TWPchxgio

[Rogue15]

he's a sleeper agent for al qaeda!!!!!!!

[Det. Bart Lasiter]

i for one am horrified that obama wants the us and russia to disarm the weapons that could render the earth uninhabitable if we fire even a fraction of our nuclear arsenals i mean what kind of long term goal is that nuclear weapons our a corner stone of are american democrasee.

 

also missile defense systems will just raise tensions between the us and russia and force russia to come up with new weapons to bypass our missile defense system (which probably wouldn't work anyway) in addition to taking the idea of nuclear war from the "if i'm going down you are too *******" table and put it on the "hmm yeah why not" table since it could technically be "winnable" if the us has some sort of missile defense regardless of its viability. tl;dr: tell me why funding a missile defense system is doing anything but parking wheelbarrows full of money into the offices of boeing and whatever other aerospace defense contractors (i stole this line from some sa poster i forget the name of because it's awesome possum).

 

also your theory that all the other countries will gang up on the us at recess is a horrible idea, the us' defense budget dwarfs that of every other country on the map because of our military-industrial complex and obsession with how awesome guns and the 2nd amendment are and since bigger = better larger death counts = better. and you can't beat the death count of a nuclear exchange because hurr hurr it will most likely kill off every form of life on the planet between the initial blasts, fallout, and nuclear winter.

 

your assertion that the us wouldn't fire nuclear weapons is just flat out wrong, during the cold war, both the us and the ussr tried for years to find ways of bombing the **** out of one another without getting bombed the **** out of in retaliation. to name an example where the us nearly deployed nuclear weapons, look at the cuban missile crisis, we nearly bombed cuba as a preemptive strike against the ussr. for an example of where the us did nuke another country without being fired upon by nuclear weapons, japan.

 

finally, to address your point about other countries manufacturing new nuclear weapons and that being a gun pointing at the rest of the world, the us did that exact same thing. and countries manufacturing new nuclear weapons would obviously have to be prevented via diplomacy or if necessary, by force.

 

@rogue15- i'd love to see you make a post about how obama is somehow violating your upscale lifestyle that doesnt make you look like some 12 year old mongoloid tia

[Lance Monance]

I saw a youtube audio where Obama is talking about working with Russia to disarm our ICBMs, wants to take our early warning system off hair trigger alert, and cut funding for these types of defense systems. He wants a world without nuclear weapons. It would be great if no one had nukes in the world, but I doubt Russia nad other countries would just do that. And if we disarm first what's to stop other countries from seeing that as an oppertunity to wipe us out off the map. I don't want to die a nuclear death. I know we won't fire ours unless someone did to us. And if no one had nukes what's to stop someone from making new ones. If then someone had them and no one else did they'd have a gun pointed at the world in a sense.

 

I believe the only reason why we have our nukes and missile sheild pointed at Russia is because they have them and we want to prevent WWIII nuclear war.

 

Anyway, here's the audio: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8TWPchxgio

Looks like a variation of the prisoner's dilemma to me.

 

Here's what we don't want: Nuclear war, nuclear weapons.

Now, the dominant strategy appears to be to retain nuclear weapons. We can't get rid of them because other countries might blast us then, right?

 

Well, if that is what everyone thinks then no one is going to give up nuclear weapons. You know what's not going to happen? Other countries disarming and the US gets to retain their nuclear weapons.

 

Good thing Obama doesn't think that way.

[SD Nihil]

No. If we disarm first people like Russia will use that chance to wipe us off the map. And that won't kill everyone on the planet if everyone is fireing at us. And if Obama believes it when Russia says they'll disarm he's wrong. Russia lies. They've not pulled out of Georgia. They lie. We can't trust them.

 

If we disarm all that will happen is we die and they live because we'll have no nukes to fire at them. They will have nukes and then we don't exist. Russia is untrustworthy. You know I will never care that people think we're just an evil bad nation that seeks to conquer everyone. We are a nation that goes to war only to spread freedom, end tyrany, oppression, and we've given more lives, money, and aid than any one country in the world. And yet they all hate us. I can't believe and I won't belive for a second that other countries wouldn't use it as an opportunity to blow us up if they had nukes and we didn't.

 

We are not the aggressors. We are not the conquers like Russia would would love to re conquer their former territories. I really don't care that countries hate us. Great we don't like you jerks either who I know would love for us not to exist and if they had a chance to end us they would. For all the good we've done they are jelous and whiny. Well when their is no America you'll have no one to run to for help or compain about except those conquers we tried to protect you from.

 

Russia was the one wanting to fire the nukes on us. The cold war and Cuba missile crisis we wanted them to stop because if one country fires yes we'd do everything in our power to protect us. But we were not the one who starts the aggressive move. We won't simply fire a nuke at someone one day. If the talbes were turned and Russia had no nukes, but we did we'd not use them because we are not Russia. We wouldn't fire it at all. And if they atacked one of our allies we won't fire them. It is supposed to be a last resort hope to never use them prevent others from using one tpe of weapon.

[Astor]

I saw a youtube audio where Obama is talking about working with Russia to disarm our ICBMs, wants to take our early warning system off hair trigger alert, and cut funding for these types of defense systems. He wants a world without nuclear weapons.

 

I want a world without nuclear weapons too. Nuclear weapons are pointless anyway - no-one in their right mind (even Russia) would be stupid enough to use them.

 

I know we won't fire ours unless someone did to us

 

So could you point me to the site of the Japanese Nuclear attack on America in 1945?

 

Oh wait, you can't, because the US is the only country to have actually partaken in nuclear warfare.

[SD Nihil]

We all would want no nukes. But the reality is there are people who want America dead, who know how to make it, and who want to simply conquer. And the cat is out of the bag. If they have nukes we have to have the to prevent them from firing theres because if they did we'd destroy them too. So again it is a way to prevent somene from firing them. It's again a last resort, hope to never use it, if we didn't have them they'd either fire on other inocent countries or use it on others. So we use it to protect our interests and protect us from nuclear war. A defense that is simply meant as a deterent so others don't use theres. And we can because we won't use them unless someone were to nuke us. Otherwise we'll never fire them. If we wre the single nation with nukes and no one else had them we would not blow someone up. The only reason why we fireed on at the end of WWII is to save more allied and American lives from having to have a bloody war with Japan. We did it to save lives for our allies and us. If we didn't we'd lose and our allies would lose mroe lives.

 

Nukes are scary. And unlike Russia we won't ue it to conquer and obliderate countries we just don't like. But they would if they had nukes and we didn't.

 

Yes Russia would use them because they wouldn't have any lose. They would have no fear of any harm on them if they knew we had no nukes. They know we are a threat to their want to conquer the world so they'd love to have us without nukes because then they'd just nuke us out of existance. And taht wouldn't hurt the world at all. We'd be the only smoking radiation filled crater.

[Rogue15]

@rogue15- i'd love to see you make a post about how obama is somehow violating your upscale lifestyle that doesnt make you look like some 12 year old mongoloid tia

 

he isn't violating anything, he's not in office yet.

[SD Nihil]

He will. And if he disarms us then the US will be no more because Russia nad China will see it as an oppertunity to nuke us out of existance. I don't trust them for a second that they'd remove theirs because we said they should. They don't trust us either. So if both sides don't trust each other then again both sides shouldn't put the gun down for fear they believe the other will use that as an oppertunity to kill the other. Again its a weapon we hope to never use again than that one time against Japan. It's to prevent others from doing it to inocents and us. We will not use it to conquer. They will Russia will. And we are not Russia.

[Rogue15]

i don't think china would nuke us, don't we buy alot of stuff from them?

[SD Nihil]

China is signing up 100yr leases to drill in the gulf and we are not. Obama won't drill. China is buying up all hte concrete and stuff. They are fortefying their cities, and building up their navy. And even if China was not in the picute, Iran and Russia would fire nukes on us if we had none. And Obama would be foolish to believe that Russia disarmed and Iran too if they said they disarmed. They lie and we can't trust them.

[Achilles]

I need threads like these to help me remember why other countries think that people from the United States are a bunch of cave-dwelling war-mongers.

[mimartin]

Obama said he would negotiate with Russia to take us off hair trigger and the huge jump in logic is that equals unilateral disarmament.

 

Obama also said he would not pursue a missile defense system until it was viable. So, not wasting billions of dollars on something that gives you a false sense of security is bad?

[Det. Bart Lasiter]

he isn't violating anything, he's not in office yet.

well, at least you can dodge questions by pointing out how i left out a word with some proficiency.

 

I need threads like these to help me remember why other countries think that people from the United States are a bunch of cave-dwelling war-mongers.

quotin dis

[SD Nihil]

The war mongers are Russia who attack nations unprovoked and who are inocent. And we again have every right as other soverign nations to defend themselves. And we have every right as other nuclear nations to have nukes as a weapon that we hope never gets used again, but as a last resort to deter other nuclear nations from using theirs to attack us and harm others.

 

Obama is wanting to do this because he thinks he can appease true war mongers like Russia who are bent on seeing the US dead. Comon sense says if two people are facing each oother with guns you the one who only uses the gun in defense won't lower your weapon if the other country will fire theirs in the split second you lower yours. You won't fire yours unless they fire. ANd you won't fire yours if they lower theres. But if you lower yours they'll fire on you. So in no way would you lower. And you can't negociate with countries hell bent on seeing the US and all who love freedom dead.

 

And those systems keep you guys safe to act like peacenicks. Obama is weak and is kissing the butts of Russia and will of terrorists because he's Jimmy Carter who was the worst presient, but Obama is also Carter with a side of socialistic, class warfare toting, wimpy president to be. He'll be the death of us.

 

Yeah I bet you all from other countries would love to see us gone wouldn't you. You've love for Russia to nuke us to death. We conservatives won't let that happen. And if they try to take our guns we Americans will have a revolution and cue our own government. That's right Gasp. lol. The whole reason why we have the second amendment is to have guns in case the government becomes oppressive and tyranical and wishes to be like how England was with the colonies.

 

Countries like Russia don't respect weakness. ANd Obama is showing weakness. And weakness invites aggression. And no if someone else is whoing weakness to the US we will not show aggression unless they show aggression. That is because we are not war mongers like Russia.

[Det. Bart Lasiter]

The war mongers are Russia who attack nations unprovoked and who are inocent. And we again have every right as other soverign nations to defend themselves. And we have every right as other nuclear nations to have nukes as a weapon that we hope never gets used again, but as a last resort to deter other nuclear nations from using theirs to attack us and harm others.

 

Obama is wanting to do this because he thinks he can appease true war mongers like Russia who are bent on seeing the US dead. Comon sense says if two people are facing each oother with guns you the one who only uses the gun in defense won't lower your weapon if the other country will fire theirs in the split second you lower yours. You won't fire yours unless they fire. ANd you won't fire yours if they lower theres. But if you lower yours they'll fire on you. So in no way would you lower. And you can't negociate with countries hell bent on seeing the US and all who love freedom dead.

 

And those systems keep you guys safe to act like peacenicks. Obama is weak and is kissing the butts of Russia and will of terrorists because he's Jimmy Carter who was the worst presient, but Obama is also Carter with a side of socialistic, class warfare toting, wimpy president to be. He'll be the death of us.

 

Yeah I bet you all from other countries would love to see us gone wouldn't you. You've love for Russia to nuke us to death. We conservatives won't let that happen. And if they try to take our guns we Americans will have a revolution and cue our own government. That's right Gasp. lol. The whole reason why we have the second amendment is to have guns in case the government becomes oppressive and tyranical and wishes to be like how England was with the colonies.

thank god for you conservatives who keep us all safe with your guns i bet they really make the russian army think twice. alternatively, people like you could stop stirring up **** on the international stage or perhaps even not **** up the economy so that if any of your half-cocked theories comes to fruition, we could actually be prepared for a war on that scale.

[Litofsky]

The war mongers are Russia who attack nations unprovoked and who are inocent. And we again have every right as other soverign nations to defend themselves. And we have every right as other nuclear nations to have nukes as a weapon that we hope never gets used again, but as a last resort to deter other nuclear nations from using theirs to attack us and harm others.

 

lolwut? What gives you the right to paint the Russians as "war mongers?" We've invaded just as many nations as Russia (Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.).

 

Obama is wanting to do this because he thinks he can appease true war mongers like Russia who are bent on seeing the US dead. Comon sense says if two people are facing each oother with guns you the one who only uses the gun in defense won't lower your weapon if the other country will fire theirs in the split second you lower yours. You won't fire yours unless they fire. ANd you won't fire yours if they lower theres. But if you lower yours they'll fire on you. So in no way would you lower. And you can't negociate with countries hell bent on seeing the US and all who love freedom dead.

 

So, what special properties give you the ability to see into President-elect Obama's head? Please, do explain. How does being diplomatic make someone weak? Because we want to reduce our nuclear weapons, we're weak?

 

And those systems keep you guys safe to act like peacenicks. Obama is weak and is kissing the butts of Russia and will of terrorists because he's Jimmy Carter who was the worst presient, but Obama is also Carter with a side of socialistic, class warfare toting, wimpy president to be. He'll be the death of us.

 

Thank you for your pure opinions. Please, do add some fact to that statement.

 

Yeah I bet you all from other countries would love to see us gone wouldn't you. You've love for Russia to nuke us to death. We conservatives won't let that happen. And if they try to take our guns we Americans will have a revolution and cue our own government. That's right Gasp. lol. The whole reason why we have the second amendment is to have guns in case the government becomes oppressive and tyranical and wishes to be like how England was with the colonies.

 

...what? Why do you assume that every other country in this world wants the United States to die? I agree with what you said about the Second Amendment- I believe Jefferson said that the only time we should use it is when "they" try to take it away. However, the context in which you used it makes no sense.

 

Clarification is in order.

 

Countries like Russia don't respect weakness. ANd Obama is showing weakness. And weakness invites aggression. And no if someone else is whoing weakness to the US we will not show aggression unless they show aggression.

 

Again, how is diplomacy a weakness? I fail to see this. Weakness may invite aggression, but, once more, I don't understand how sitting down and talking to someone (or even reasoning with them!) is a weakness.

 

That is because we are not war mongers like Russia.

 

I reiterate: lolwut?

[SD Nihil]

thank god for you conservatives who keep us all safe with your guns i bet they really make the russian army think twice.

 

Our nukes will do that as a deterent. And our guns will do the same for our government and keep those wimply pencil pushers in line too.

 

people like you could stop stirring up **** on the international stage or perhaps even not **** up the economy so that if any of your half-cocked theories comes to fruition, we could actually be prepared for a war on that scale.

 

We are not the ones causing junk like Russia. We didn't start WWII or 1 like Germany, Itily, or Japan. We are not the ones doing that. But we are the ones who defend others. And we even defend peacenicks. :wink

 

And as for the economy it was not just Bush. It was the democrats who straight party lines apposed the republicans on regulation to fanny may and freedy mac. And they are stil allowing AIG who twice used our tax dollars and bailout money to have them relax in hot tubs and waste your money. And we are giving them money. They are ones like Palosi who will jsut bash Bush when it was them and Barney Frank who were also responsible for the probelms with fanny and freddie.

 

A lot of the spending I was against that bush did. He's not a true Republican. He's for amnesty, big government, bailouts, and spends too much. He's moe left than right.

 

I wouldn'tve loved to have Romni, or Huckabee.

 

lolwut? What gives you the right to paint the Russians as "war mongers?" We've invaded just as many nations as Russia (Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.).

 

They are war mongering they've claimed parts of Georiga as part of their own. When we invade and by the way with Iraq we'll leave and it will be their own country. We freed them and to defend others is not war mongering. In my opinion your view of us is very warped.

 

So, what special properties give you the ability to see into President-elect Obama's head? Please, do explain. How does being diplomatic make someone weak? Because we want to reduce our nuclear weapons, we're weak?

 

Because if he does not follow through with wanting to do the disarming then we can't trust his word that he says what he means and means what he says either. But I am givng him the benefit of the doubt that he does seek to disarm us.

 

..what? Why do you assume that every other country in this world wants the United States to die? I agree with what you said about the Second Amendment- I believe Jefferson said that the only time we should use it is when "they" try to take it away. However, the context in which you used it makes no sense.

 

Disarming our guns or nukes I consider the same thing. Both mean we have no equel power to defend ourselves nationally or internationally.

 

Again, how is diplomacy a weakness? I fail to see this. Weakness may invite aggression, but, once more, I don't understand how sitting down and talking to someone (or even reasoning with them!) is a weakness.

 

When it comes ot countries like Russia they don't wnat to put down their nukes. Neither does Iran. They want to use them. And our sanctions and warnings have done nothing to stop Iran.

 

As for your little Iraq link. Iraq war mongeringly invaded Kuwaitt who was inocent. We beat Saddam. He said he asked for us to stop and that he surrenders. We said okay Saddam we'll stop as long as you get out of Kuwaitt and allow inspectors in. The inspectors are to make sure you don't crete any new weapons to harm your neighbors.

 

That was a cease fire agreement. Not a declaration of end of war peace. So the Gulf war never ended. Eventually Saddma stalls with the U.N. inspectors. We say let us in our we'll sanction you. He kicks us out in direction violation of our agreemtn regarless if he had any weapons or not. We pass many sanctions and Saddm did not comply. 14 resoutions(warnigns) did nothing either.

 

So we wanted the U.N. to stuport us with aid, policing forces, and support if we went into Iraq. They din't want to go in because they are peacenicks, had their corrupt Food for Oil deal, and never really like us or rarely support us anyway.

 

Oil for food scandel whcih was siply where they wanted to give Saddm food to feed his people in exchange for oil. Saddm wouldn't feed his own people so the U.N. wanted to do it for him. But the un moral U.N. didn't want us to go into Iraq because they'd lose out on their deal with Saddam and lose the oil they were getting so they can line thir pockets with money.

 

On top of htat the food was not going to feed Saddma's hungry people. It was going to feed Saddma army. And the U.N. says they are a humananitarian organization. Sounds like a bunch of corrupt money grubbing thugs who have been of little use to the US and those who value freedom anyway. They rarely side with us.

 

It does not matter thaye had no weapons. They broke a agreemtn and they got beat. And we then freed their people. All of South Iraq, Anbar, and several other provences are totally now controled by Iraqies and there is mostly peace. But there will always be occasional bombings like how Israil has it. But it's much better than a rule that Saddam had over Iraq.

 

And their country will be theirs not ours. Unlike Russia who claims part of Georgia as theirs.

[Rogue15]

well, at least you can dodge questions by pointing out how i left out a word with some proficiency.

 

You never asked me a question.

[Achilles]

Reality check

 

To accuse other nations of being imperialist aggressors while completing ignoring our foreign policies for past 60 years belies a level of hypocrisy without limits.

 

Addendum: it occurs to me that I may have spoken to hastily. It could be either phenomenal hypocrisy or willful ignorance. Either works.

[SD Nihil]

To accuse other nations of being imperialist aggressors while completing ignoring our foreign policies for past 60 years belies a level of hypocrisy without limits.

 

So we can't call them war mongers, but you can call us taht. Double standard. No America you can't do this say this or that or you get called racist, arogant or mean. Wah. It's like a boxing match and we are told you can't fight with two hands and you have to fight with one tied behind your back, but your appoinent can fight with two hands. Wah we hate America. We obay the U.N. rules, but when it becomes that the U.N. supports oil for food scandels and stuff like that then yeah screw what they think. We as Americans believe we are right and no one can tell us what to say do, or believe. We think we in our right to have nukes andefend ourselves. Your afraid of us don't be. We're not Russia. If we had nuks and no one would fear from us because if we had nukes and others didn't we would not fire on anyone. It's because we are not Russia. I know that's hard to believe since your so use to being around tyranical nations like Russia who we want to protect you from.

 

And I really don't care if war spending puts me in a poor house lives mean more to me, or should I say American lives and our allies mean more to us than money. Oh that's right the U.N. doesn't get that. They were willing to sacrifice lives to still line their pickets for cash while ignoring that Saddma was not giving to food to his people. Some organization that is. Worthless to our ends.

 

just when i lost hope for this thread you come in to post off-topic, non-nonsensical blather about evolution ty m@rs

 

Like every political topic I get into with you people I don't drive it off topic you guys seem to always bring up Iraq or something else and I simply respond. I will respond because again I have every right to defend myself. You can post I can post. Let's not disarm my post either. lol.

 

I came here wanting someone to offer some info I din't know of how Obama won't do this because of this rule or that rule or we'll prevent him this way or that. And I also thought I could have a civil conversation with people. I know you guys are far left, but I thought we could agree on this. Obvously when it even comes to America's survival we can't agree. Not going to bother anymore.

 

From here on out I'll simply use LF for what it is supposed to be for which is topics related to the different Star Wars games. And also I can tell here I'm not getting anywahere either especially when I see someone go ahaha I made a off topic post thing. Not going to bother.

 

Bye. If you feel the need to have the last word that's fine there is no one here other than you far left who agree with each other and no one else your talking to is on the fense or is conservative. End of political discussions that waste my time. I wish they'd put in a delete topic button for one who create the topic. Waste.

[Achilles]

So we can't call them war mongers, but you can call us taht. Double standard.

You missed the point entirely. To accuse another country of war-mongering when we are by far the largest transgressor is hypocrisy. It has absolutely nothing to do with whether they are being war-mongers or not.

 

It's kinda like getting mad at your significant other for cheating when you've nailed anything that moves for the entire length of the relationship.

[Litofsky]

I'm sorry that you feel that way, Nihil. We can have a calm, reasonable discussion. However, just as you post your views and (some of us) look at them, (we'd) ask you to do the same. If, after you've done that, your mind has not changed, that's alright. However, (we'd) ask you to extend that courtesy to (us).

[Astor]

So we can't call them war mongers, but you can call us taht. Double standard.

 

Hardly. As Achilles pointed out, it would be dishonest in the extreme to point fingers at other nations while disregarding your own nation's less than peaceful past.

 

We as Americans believe we are right and no one can tell us what to say do, or believe.

 

Do you speak for all of the American people?

 

We think we in our right to have nukes andefend ourselves. Your afraid of us don't be. We're not Russia.

 

No one should have the 'right' to have nukes, much less the right to actually use them.

 

If we had nuks and no one would fear from us because if we had nukes and others didn't we would not fire on anyone.

 

It's natural to fear the strong - especially when they take part in needless displays of destruction (Hiroshima, Nagasaki).

[Doomie]

Your afraid of us don't be. We're not Russia. If we had nuks and no one would fear from us because if we had nukes and others didn't we would not fire on anyone. It's because we are not Russia. I know that's hard to believe since your so use to being around tyranical nations like Russia who we want to protect you from.

 

 

Wait, what? Did I step into a time portal back to the fifties or something?

 

The cold war is over man. Yeah, it's hard to believe but it was all over the news like seventeen years back.

 

It's not as black-and-white as 'America is good and can be trusted with nukes, Russia is evil and cannot be trusted with nukes'. You have to consider their motives. If America saw a good reason to nuke anyone, they would do so, and if Russia doesn't have a good reason to nuke anyone, they won't. And as far as I can tell they have no reason to go and piss off the mightiest military and political superpower in the world. What the hell for? To start WWIII just for kicks?

 

Frankly, if you're afraid of being nuked the moment you lay down you nuclear arms, I think there may be a problem with your foreign policy.

 

PS. To be honest I'm more afraid of America starting WWIII right now than Russia, but maybe Obama will change that.