Jah Warrior Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 OK, greetings, happy new year and all that jazz! This is something that has been getting on my nerves for some time now and if i dont vent it i will explode so here goes, It may end up in a flame war and it may annoy some people but lets try to keep this a reasoned and adult thread. Nuclear Disarmament:- What with the escalating tensions in Iraq and the recent news that North Korea intends to resume its's nuclear program, I feel this needs discussion. I for one think that the entire concept of nuclear warfare or weaponry is utterly diabolical. It appears that the West believe that they are the only peoples entitled to wield such weapons be it as a defensive measure or indeed as an offensive weapon. (read:- Hiroshima/Nagasaki). How can the West judge them self as being responsible enough to have such weapons above any others. Is this an indication that the West is believing their own hype? I think it does. :/ I find it incredible that the West is parading around demanding that Saddam Hussein and North Korea be stripped of all weapons of mass destruction when the West does indeed have a HUGE arsenal of Nuclear weapons themself. Rather than stripping the smaller countries of these weapons I would have to say that Global nuclear disarmamnet is the only real solution. The smaller, allegedly rogue states will never be compelled to disarm themself while the West is sitting on an arsenal of Nukes themself. I find it incredibly hipocritical that the West is making these demands, its a case of the pot calling the kettle black. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackDove Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 Wheres the option "Everyone should have an Ion Cannon to shoot down missiles in trajectory, and geiger counters so that the things can't be smuggled anywhere"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kain Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 i've seen the future. i've played fallout 1 and 2. to me, that game hits damn close to home with all this bs going on. scary part is, we aint got vaults to huddle ourselves away in. that and the threat of no more than 2 hours going by before the entire planet is nearly stripped of all life. nuclear weapons. pfft. purley human ignorance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jah Warrior Posted January 2, 2003 Author Share Posted January 2, 2003 Originally posted by BlackDove Wheres the option "Everyone should have an Ion Cannon to shoot down missiles in trajectory, and geiger counters so that the things can't be smuggled anywhere"? ever more intelligent by the day i see Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 i think he had a lapse of sanity black dove. oh well. yall like my vote im the only one who voted for it. we are all gonna destroy eachother anyways. so . i say... GO NUTS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiRtY $oUtH™ Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 If one country cant have it, then no country should have it. Honestly, its a diabolical weapon. Why do we create weaopns of mass destruction? It only brings fear and panic. You dont know if you're gonna wake up one morning and all of a sudden you see a flash and you're gone. You might not even see the flash. But the fear is always there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lunatic Jedi Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 The very existence of nuclear weapons poses a threat to Earth. Even if every country had the full intention of never EVER using them, they still exist, and are still very volatile. No matter how well-protected they are, they are still dangerous, whatever can go wrong eventually will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thehomicidalegg Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 But if no one has nukes, what do we do if the aliens attack? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 hey thats one of the laws of life . whatever can go wrong...will Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thehomicidalegg Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 the problem is that there is no universal rule. when a certain group adhere to a rule, others won't. Therefore everyone has them "just in case". The veil of suspicion and ill-feeling between countries in the world will prevent any restriction on the possessions of weapons of mass destruction or any form of weapons for that matter. To order all weapons to be destroyed would be folly as there will always be those who defy such orders. By imposing laws that only limits self will disadvantage oneself against adversity. Therefor the way around this is to eliminate animosity amongst people, so the need to use these weapons against eachother become non-existant. The only solution to the dilima of who should possess weapon of mass destructions are to eliminate the dilema. The improbable future of an United Earth must be achieved, where all countries abandon their differences for the greater good, to all be togther as one. This is too idealistic, i think, to be realiistic and conflicts with the nature of human behavior. Another option is to abandon all restrictions so all nations can possess weapons. Mutual fear of avengence attacks and the general horrific scale of war may prevent nations from actually using these weapons. I don not believe this can be a solution, however, as: 1. This assumes that every nation have significant power to be feared at, which is highly improbable.(unless theres a process of eliminating the weakest nation - something far inhumane to consider, and contradictory to the object of the process) 2. Assumes that only parties or sects are nations, untrue as seen resently with terrorist groups that war may not be just between nations but also between small groups of martyrs or such. 3. Assumes that people in control of such vast power to destruct have a certain level of intelligence and restraint, again untrue in a world where many idiots have came to power in powerful nations/empires at variouis stages of history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ratmjedi Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 I guess I am the only one that is going to get flamed but oh well so be it. The only reason that the West has so many Nuclear weapons is because of the Nuclear Arms race that went on between the USA and the former U.S.S.R. in the 60's. After that we really didn't need them because there was no major threat. We both had them so that incase somone pushed the button we could retaliate and vice versa. There are also Nuclear weapon's that the former U.S.S.R. had that are unacounted for and God know's in who's hand's they might be in at this moment. Now you say why do we have them now? Because there is always going to be someone that is going to want to have on in there aresenal. I know that the USA has a lot of Nuclear Weapons but why shouldn't we? You keep bringing up Hiroshima/ Nagasaki. That decision was a just a fair one when you look at what it accomplished. Truman made that decision because he knew that a compain on Japan would cost nunmerouse lives that did not need to be wasted. Japan thought that we were bluffing when we told them about the A-Bomb. We weren't bluffing and it finally caused a Armistice. If you look at the lives that would of been lost if we didn't drop the bomb it would drastcally outweight that of how many people lost their lives at Hiroshima/Nagasaki. We also warned Japan to surrender numerous times with a threat that there would be grave consequences to suffer. Now in te present were we live today, how many country's have Nuclear Weapon's? There are many that tested and finally developed their own. Now we keep saying why we have them and that is a simple one. Do you think that if we told everyone to disarm that they would do it so willingly? There would also be that country that would see it's chance to become stronger and hide one or fake the documention that they disarmed every Nuclear Weapon. We live in a very scary society my friend we there are the wealthy and the poor and the good and the bad. Nomatter how hard we try their is going to be no peace. Someone is going to have it in their crazy mind to use a weapon that could destroy life. Now Iraq and N. Korea are not very trusting country's. They have both lied before and what is going to stop them from doing it again? Iraq does have Terrorist ties if you want to believe it or not. What is going to stop them from giving terrorist's a weapon of that calibur? If there were no terrorist's then I would be ok with them having a Nuke. Their Nuclear capability at the moment is only a couple of miles right now. They wouldn't even be able to make it to the Atlantic. Korea has also been a hot spot over the past 50 year's. The situation is still like it was when we stopped our Military Involvement over there in the 50's. The reason that we are there now is to preserve peace. We are longer waging war over there but protecting the border's in case N. Korea decides to start war again. Why doesn't anyone look at China right now? They have Nuclear weapons as well but no one ever talks about them. They have the same capability's that we do now but no one ever look's at them as evil. America has always lent a hand to other country's. Had we not been involved in war's across the globe Hitler's Heir would be controlling Europe and quite honestly the West. We have changed the face of this world so many times. We wouldn't be as in much trouble as we are in right now if we haden't gotten involved and just of stuck to Isalationism (Sp?) for these past 60 year's. We would not be in as much debt and we would actually be able to improve ourselves as a whole. That is what I am sick of, these Sterotypical Ideas that all we want to do is conrtol the world and be Mommy and Daddy for the rest of the world. We are always seen as being eager to go to war but that is because it is the only option that we have left. No counrty really want's to go to war. Every counrty want's to have peace but it won't happen in today's world. We risk our fathers, sons, granfathers, and familiy member's when we go to war or are involved in a foreign conflict. How many country's have had a lot of blood shed throughout this Century? Not many but those country's knew what needed to be done. I am going to end now cause frankly I am tired of hearing all this negativity about my country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lunatic Jedi Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 Originally posted by Ratmjedi If you look at the lives that would of been lost if we didn't drop the bomb it would drastcally outweight that of how many people lost their lives at Hiroshima/Nagasaki. But you forget something. The people who died in Hiroshima/Nagasaki were CIVILIANS. Tens of thousands of innocent people were vaporized, and then thousands more died from the radiation poisoning. If a campaign had been launched, the people who lost their lives would have been soldiers. Soldiers are people who are trained to fight and always carry the knowledge that when they enter combat, they probably won't come back. Instead of losing the lives of soldiers who were trained to kill and were not afraid to die, we lost the lives of innocent people who wanted to live, and to carry on with their lives, and do something to help the world. No amount of dead warriors can make up for the loss of an innnocent life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ratmjedi Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 That is true but think of what Japan's population would of been like if they has lost all their young men? There would be no young men to carry on and to rebuild Japan. They were also warned numourous time about it but they continued to ignore it. The Bomb also had to be tested on a good target. There was no concentration of Soldier's anywhere that would of been signifacent to show Japan and the world about the power of it. The civilians also died but they were mainly elderly and had lived out their lives. Innocent people always die no matter how hard it is avoided. It's calleteral damage like it is so cleverly called. No matter what civilians are going to die. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jah Warrior Posted January 2, 2003 Author Share Posted January 2, 2003 I can't believe anyone can condone the use of nuclear weapons - ie hiroshima/nagasaki, if i had my way who ever made the decision to drop those bombs should have been had up as a war criminal. this excuse that it saved lives is the most proposterous thing i have EVER read, its propaganda to make you feel better about killing tens of thousands of "CIVILIANS" The September 11th attack is minor in comparison to the atom bombs being dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jah Warrior Posted January 2, 2003 Author Share Posted January 2, 2003 Originally posted by Ratmjedi That is true but think of what Japan's population would of been like if they has lost all their young men? There would be no young men to carry on and to rebuild Japan. They were also warned numourous time about it but they continued to ignore it. The Bomb also had to be tested on a good target. There was no concentration of Soldier's anywhere that would of been signifacent to show Japan and the world about the power of it. The civilians also died but they were mainly elderly and had lived out their lives. Innocent people always die no matter how hard it is avoided. It's calleteral damage like it is so cleverly called. No matter what civilians are going to die. holy crap you are insane :/ you really do worry me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ratmjedi Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 Everyone is entitled to their own opinion Jah You can also blame Hitler for Nuke's cause he started it all. But as for using Nuclear Weapon's it is a sad neccesity that we have to have now. Had their been no Nuke's the world would be a happier place but then again their would be some other sicko desiging another weapon of the same calibur or even worse. holy crap you are insane :/ you really do worry me. Sorry you feel that way but it is War. What do you expect. There have been numourous incident's like that but decisions had to be made. Truman was also the Commander in Chief at the time and there have been attempt's to try him I think because we did a mock trial where I was Truman and was tried for the same thing. It does look bad but you also have to do research and find out the fact's. There were many considerations made when Truman decided to drop it but it had to be done. It was ultimatly the best decision that could of been made at that time and circumstance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jah Warrior Posted January 2, 2003 Author Share Posted January 2, 2003 Originally posted by Ratmjedi You keep bringing up Hiroshima/ Nagasaki. That decision was a just a fair one when you look at what it accomplished. Truman made that decision because he knew that a compain on Japan would cost nunmerouse lives that did not need to be wasted. Japan thought that we were bluffing when we told them about the A-Bomb. We weren't bluffing and it finally caused a Armistice. If you look at the lives that would of been lost if we didn't drop the bomb it would drastcally outweight that of how many people lost their lives at Hiroshima/Nagasaki. We also warned Japan to surrender numerous times with a threat that there would be grave consequences to suffer. and this makes the killing of "130,000" civillians right does it? Originally posted by Ratmjedi Now Iraq and N. Korea are not very trusting country's. They have both lied before and what is going to stop them from doing it again?. And the West has never lied have we? Originally posted by Ratmjedi Iraq does have Terrorist ties if you want to believe it or not. The west doesn't? what about the IRA? Bin Laden was trained and funded by the West to start as well. Originally posted by Ratmjedi Had we not been involved in war's across the globe Hitler's Heir would be controlling Europe and quite honestly the West. If the US had been involved from the start then WW2 would not have lasted 6yrs it may never have become a major conflict in fact. Originally posted by Ratmjedi How many country's have had a lot of blood shed throughout this Century? Not many but those country's knew what needed to be done. What? ok here is a list of countries involved in war in the last 100yrs:- Afganistan, Russia, China, Yugoslavia, GREAT Britain, France, Spain, Austria, Germany, Egypt, Greece, Australia, Somalia, Ivory Coast, Nigeria, India, Pakistan, Viet Nam, Japan, Finland, Italy, Belgium, Holland, Canada, Columbia, Argentina, Peru, Chile, Colombia, Need I go on? In fact the only country i can think of that hasnt been at war in the last 100 yrs is Switzerland. My god ratm, I suspect you may be president one day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiRtY $oUtH™ Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 and the debate continues..who will be victorious? Stay tuned for the next episode of "Let's talk senselessly about nukes and how stupid their very existence is" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kstar__2 Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 darth yoda, if you are not ready for a serious discussion, tha don't post that kind of "crap". nothing is going to make nukes good, or even less bad, it might be shocking to read this but this is my opinion: i think that so called smart bombs are good. we started out with the massive nukes, that could kill thousands of people with a single hit, but now, we don't need to anymore, we got smart bombs, that can hit a target the size of a house, without damaging the surrounding area. and though no war is clean, the smart bombs make the war a bit cleaner. now this aint a propaganda talk for smart bombs, it's just my opinion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jah Warrior Posted January 2, 2003 Author Share Posted January 2, 2003 Originally posted by kstar__2 it might be shocking to read this but this is my opinion: i think that so called smart bombs are good. we started out with the massive nukes, that could kill thousands of people with a single hit, but now, we don't need to anymore, we got smart bombs, that can hit a target the size of a house, without damaging the surrounding area. and though no war is clean, the smart bombs make the war a bit cleaner. now this aint a propaganda talk for smart bombs, it's just my opinion now that makes sense a semi positive step towards reducing civilian casualties. Of course the only true solution is to not wage war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Datheus Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 If we want to blow each other up... Go for it. But don't salt the earth in the process... Nuclear bombs will not only wipe out populations, but the utter devistation to the earth will also wipe out any chance for recovery... But then again... if we're launching that many nukes to completely destroy the planet... We deserved it... we fire two nukes at Japan.. and they didn't even take out the entire city... Granted they were large, but nonetheless... Besides... We've pretty much saved ourselves from natural extinction... this is life's little way of saying "You're ****ed anyway"... We'll bring our extinction on our lonesome Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jah Warrior Posted January 2, 2003 Author Share Posted January 2, 2003 Originally posted by Datheus we fire two nukes at Japan.. and they didn't even take out the entire city... Granted they were large, but nonetheless... Hiroshima acheived 97% destruction of the city with 70,000 killed instantly and 70,000 casualties (i suspect many died later) Nagasaki i do not have as much info on:- but 60,000 were killed instantly according to the history books. I was also horrified to find that Japan was in fact on their knees when these bombs were dropped, may tibbets and truman rot in hell for what they did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCanr2d2 Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 There are many inventions that we all wish could be undone, and this is one of them..... Once again, it's a thread that has degenerated into the mindless banter of Pro US v Con US, always seems to happen. Although it seems to happen when some Pro US sprouts off things about saving other countries from war.. Once again, like most discussions, there are the Utopian positions, and the real world ones. In an Utopian world, there would be no need for Nukes at all, but that ain't gonna happen. Australia still has parts of it laid to waste thanks to the UK testing at Woomera, and nearby Oceania neighbours have had the French do testing in the ocean as well. Both of these countries were heavily affected by WW1 & 2, so it is in their psyche to be protected by the best means possible. The French will never want to be invaded like they were in both wars, so their reaction is to arm themselves to the teeth for the "Just in case" scenario. Whilst the world seems to have a Western influence, it shouldn't be only the West that holds the weapons that could destroy the world. I don't see any need for new countries to have the possibility to produce nuclear weapons, but to keep the status quo. There is too much history between many nations to allow them to fully disarm. I am more scared of Russian missles having problems, and upsetting the Arctic Ice, than of any other nation really launching them. Anyway, I see the Fresh Water Melt of the Arctic Ice upsetting the Gulf Stream more of an issue than the weapons of mass destruction. As this will cause a severe change in the weather patterns not only for the Northern Hemisphere, but could and probably will upset the Southern Hemisphere weather patterns as well....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Datheus Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 Eh, it's been said... Everything dies... When we prevent ourselves (as a whole) from dying by natural causes... We will end up laid to waste by our own devices... People say that technology is our next step as far as evolution is concered... Technology has BECOME evolution... And with evolution comes new weak points, new diseases. Technology is, without a doubt, our future. We will rise and fall by our own evolution. Such is the way of life. I'm not too worried about nukes though... We'll find a way to null the effect... That's how it's been.. humans started with sticks... Then they found out we could beat eachother with sharp metal objects... to answer that, we developed shields... When we developed arrows, we also developed chain mail... We developed cannons and guns, we also developed trenches and bullet proof vests. We'll figure out something about the nukes at some point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sivy Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 ban them all - if people want to fight then fine, but leave innocent people out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.