Nuclear Weapons

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by saden1

Would you be willing to give up America's nuclear arsenal in exchange for a nuclear weapons free world? Is this something worth striving for?

No. You can't trust nations like Iran, North Korea, China, the new Soviet Union, Cuba, Venezuela and any nation where militant Islams reside (ex: Taliban) that can sway/intimidate Governments.

The President's hope is a noble one, in a perfect world it would be great.

However, it's naive and unrealistic. If our nuclear arsenal is dismantled, we're all going to die, guaranteed.

[CRedskinsRule]

On the peaceful side, would you be willing to invest heavily in new reactors, if it meant we could eliminate our dependence on fossil fuels?

[saden1]

How would you go about persuading others from developing nuclear weapons and more importantly insure that they don't get into the wrong hands?

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by saden1

How would you go about persuading others from developing nuclear weapons and more importantly insure that they don't get into the wrong hands?

There is no way to do this. Countries/terrorist groups who want nukes want to enforce their will on others. They will only keep taking in negotiations until they have what they want. They will never negotiate in good faith. Unfortuantely there is, has been, and always will be evil people in the world. They won't be dissuaded by sitting down and "reasoning" or "trying to understand their point of view". The only thing that keeps them at bay is the threat of a "bigger stick" and someone who will use it if necessary.

To your second point, there is no way to do this either because countries cannot police each other's territory. If some sort of treaty was signed at the UN only the countries who weren't going to pursue nuclear weapons would allow inspectors, others would thumb their noses at the UN (Iraq, N. Korea, Iran).

I know liberals think the world can have a group hug and everyone can sing "Cumbaya". It will never work that way and all the U.S. does by approaching negotiations with rogue/terrorist states is weaken it's position and endanger lives, if not immediately, definitely in the future.

"You see, there's three types of people, d**ks, p*ssies and assholes......."

[saden1]

Come on firstdown and dmek25, chill.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by saden1

Come on firstdown and dmek25, chill.

Chill what?

[CRedskinsRule]

Interesting article on fusion research Friendly 'Death Star' Laser to Recreate Sun's Power

[dmek25]

i guess he wants us to stay on topic

[Trample the Elderly]

Why would you want to get rid of nuclear weapons? We haven't had another World War since the last one was used?

"Thank God for the bomb."
Ozzy Osbourne: The Ultimate Sin Album

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by dmek25

i guess he wants us to stay on topic

The two really go hand in hand and now to answer your question. I think when Obama says he wants to meet with these third world dictators it makes them look like they have more power in the eyes of their people so that is not good. I think the way Obama is going around saying all this stuff about Cuba, not really saying any thing to N Koria, and now saying he wants to sit down with Iran is making Obama look like a weak leader. It like he is making the concessions to meet with them and not the other way around. We are the world power and we need to act like a world power to the little third world nations that are a threat to the world.

[70Chip]

There's no going back. You may as well hope for a world free from fire or the wheel.

[4mrusmc]

With this economy are you kidding? Why would you want to put so many people out of work just to rid the planet from possible mutual destruction?

But on a serious note saden1, I think that us having nukes is a poker chip that our political heros have grown too cozy with having. Like someone already has stated about the genie being out of the bottle, there is no putting her back in.

And in case you were wondering, I'm glad as hell that we dropped those two bombs on Japan to end WWII. I would be very interested to hear what your take is on that topic.

[Beemnseven]

Dwight D. Eisenhower on dropping the atomic bomb:

"I was against it on two counts. First, the Japanese were ready to surrender, and it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing. Second, I hated to see our country be the first to use such a weapon."

[Trample the Elderly]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Dwight D. Eisenhower on dropping the atomic bomb:

"I was against it on two counts. First, the Japanese were ready to surrender, and it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing. Second, I hated to see our country be the first to use such a weapon."

If they had been ready to surrender than it wouldn't have taken two. The Japanese are lucky my grandfather or great uncle weren't the President. They would've dropped eight of them, surrender or not. All you had to do was to say Jap and my uncle was ready to take your head off. He went balistic even when he was 80.
They're lucky, very lucky that there is still such a thing as Japan.

[djnemo65]

Originally Posted by Trample the Elderly

If they had been ready to surrender than it wouldn't have taken two. The Japanese are lucky my grandfather or great uncle weren't the President. They would've dropped eight of them, surrender or not. All you had to do was to say Jap and my uncle was ready to take your head off. He went balistic even when he was 80.
They're lucky, very lucky that there is still such a thing as Japan.

As are we are all. As is anyone who plays videogames or likes porn. As am I because I run through J-broads like I'm original Tecmo Bowl Bo Jackson going against the Broncos D.

Trample is basically right. You would have preferred that the US dropped the first bomb on a non-civilian target but they definitely weren't about to surrender. Nevertheless, it was a lot of grandmas and kids who died in Hiroshima, so I'm not sure "glad" is the most appropriate way to describe one's feelings about the bombing.

Getting back to the main discussion, I'm yes on nukes for the reasons already outlined, although national missile defense is a load of dung.