|
North Korea did Nuclear tests 10.8.06 (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Q5echo |
after giving it some thought...and Moet Champagne... it! decapitate the NoKo regime in one fell swoop, and let the chips fall where they may.
no more tyranical despots with nukes. the has got to stop for the good of mankind. not Bush. not Hillary. not Shehan. not Hannity. not the French. not the UN.
this will send Tehran a message.
it's time to be a hawk again.
 |
|
|
| occrider |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
ok, who's they? and what are we talking about exactly? is it the ballistic missile testing? plutonium? uranium enrichment? he's taken advantage of every diplomatic engagement on every subject imaginable for the last going on two decades.
|
Ummm they is our government. The Bush administration. The what we're talking about is weapons of mass destruction tested by a terrorist state that has never failed to make its intentions and hostilities clear.
| quote: |
i don't give a f**k about Democrats. they're stupid and they clearly aren't the answer. they can't be the answer. thats why i'm not gonna bring them into the dicussion or revise history like most Democrats enjoy doing when it comes to failed policy. |
Great. Glad we see eye to eye. They aren't the answer because they don't hold the Presidancy or congress like one party we've come to know and love. And for the past 6 years they've had nothing to do with the failed policy that has resulted in recent current events. Glad you're acknowlegding the fact that its been a failure. |
|
|
| skot_e |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ Shibby
Why?
Why can't they have nuclear weapons?
I can think of much, much more dangerous countries with much more wicked leaders who, if "disposed of", would make a much more profound positive impact on the planet.
If a mushroom cloud ever blows over this country, I would be very suspicious if it hit anywhere but Washington DC...
We're not going to do anything about this, and I hope that it doesn't create a scapegoat that will enable the completion of the lockdown of America. |
So you'd be ok with the threat against Sth Korea (with or without the US personnel based there)? It is not just the US that needs to be considered.
I agree there are others that need to be sorted, but what do you think would happen if Irans leadership was removed this weekend? How many followers would be in Iraq for Jihad by mid next week. At least the people have some degree of quality of life there, unlike N.K.
| quote: | Originally posted by occrider
The what we're talking about is weapons of mass destruction tested by a terrorist state... |
I know they're in Bushes axis of evil, but ther're not really a terrorist state are they? I mean they have no links to al-Quida, they don't do the suicide bombing etc.
They are drug runners tho.
http://www.state.gov/p/inl/rls/rm/21044.htm |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| quote: | Originally posted by occrider
Ummm they is our government. The Bush administration. The what we're talking about is weapons of mass destruction tested by a terrorist state that has never failed to make its intentions and hostilities clear. |
see you're under the impression that we [U.S. Government] can do something to diplomatically to stop tyranical despots from using weapons of mass destruction. thats just not the case is it? NoKo is not a terrorist state. this is a regional power play with Cold War overtones.
| quote: | | Great. Glad we see eye to eye. They aren't the answer because they don't hold the Presidancy or congress like one party we've come to know and love. And for the past 6 years they've had nothing to do with the failed policy that has resulted in recent current events. Glad you're acknowlegding the fact that its been a failure. |
it has nothing to do with Democrats holding any office for any length of time. i didn't hear you three years ago when they had nukes, why am i hearing you now?
sure, you can call this a failure. it's a failure 20 years in the making, but what is success?
IMO success is not having the Kim Jong Il regime calling the shots. that requires much more than any one political party in America has the stones for right now Iraq or no Iraq...Neocons are much closer to having those stones than any Pelosicrat. |
|
|
| Moongoose |
| quote: | Originally posted by occrider
Because that's what happens in total war when you have to make decisions that are not black or white. If I had to make the decision between Operation Coronet and dropping the bomb I would not hesitate for a minute. But really this is digressing from what should be discussed in this topic. |
Just to get off topic for a little bit here. While considering the casualties the other choice would bring the bomb seems like a reasonable alternative, but i wonder if Hiroshima and Nagasaki were really necessary targets. What im trying to say is, if your trying to demonstrate the power of a nuclear bomb you dont really have to level a couple of citys to do so. Sent the japs a message saying "If you want to see something cool take your binoculars and look out to sea at this time and place" then after your demonstration send another message saying "That was cool wasnt it. We have many more and next time we will aim for something more important than some sea water".
A simple threat of such a massive force unleashed on their land would surely convince japs to surrender, especialy if they thought that you could level their entire contry in one bombing run. |
|
|
| Magnetonium |
| quote: | Originally posted by Fir3start3r
That argument certainly didn't stop the Germans from trying to carpet bomb the UK back to the Stone Age... |
UK was certainly not that badly bombed, there's a reason why they won the air war. They'd be done already if they were that destroyed. In any way, the number of German civilians who were killed by Allied bombing is way more staggering! You remember what the Allies did to Dresden?
Oh, and it doesnt matter what the oppressive Jap leadership did in China, well it certianly matters, but in this case - it doesnt give any justificiation for USA to drop TWO, not ONE, nuclear weapons on innocent civilians. At least Japs military were criminals. Does USA have to go down to their standards too? I thought USA was much more civilized and had some political compromise skills that they bragged about. And all that went up in smoke of a mushroom cloud. |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| alright before this thread gets hi-jacked by the "Japs" let's consider Occrider's accurate description of "Total War" and what it meant to wage it in 1945. |
|
|
| Magnetonium |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
alright before this thread gets hi-jacked by the "Japs" let's consider Occrider's accurate description of "Total War" and what it meant to wage it in 1945. |
Lets see it. I missed it. |
|
|
| star-traveller |
| quote: | Originally posted by Magnetonium
I bet if Soviets werent going to receive nuclear technology from communist spies in the Manhattan Project, the Americans would have dropped a nuke or two on Soviet Union and forced them to accept their terms too. Pretty reasonable conclusion from my part ... |
Are you correct ? I always thought that Americans stole nuclear technology from Germans as well as Soviets did.
I cannot remember any rumors about the spies inside the Manhattan Project. |
|
|
| Magnetonium |
| quote: | Originally posted by star-traveller
Are you correct ? I always thought that Americans stole nuclear technology from Germans as well as Soviets did.
I cannot remember any rumors about the spies inside the Manhattan Project. |
Sigh ... here's a history lesson.
Manhattan project, which was top secret, involved the development of a nuclear weapon, and included several prominent scientists (whose names I forget), some of which were Germans, and one of them passed the secrets to the Soviets, mainly because he was horrified as to what the Americans did in Hiroshima and Nagasaki and he wanted to create a deterrent force.
At the same time, starting in 1941, German scientists were also developing nuclear technology, but they ran out of time and the project was damaged by bombing raids. German scientists were geniuses. They had the fastest planes in the war (BY A MARGIN!), Messershmidts, the first missiles, V1 and V2 that gave British a lot of problems, the best tanks, best submarines, amongst other controversial weapons - in fact, most of technology developed by Russians and Americans after WW2 was based on the German blueprints - like new-and-improved aircraft, tanks, development of ballistic missiles, satellites, etc. - based on German blueprints. Nazi's military and technology machine was extremely fascinating and way superior .. I hate Nazis, but their military advancements impressed me. If they didnt attack Soviet Union and finished off the West first, today we'd be living in a Nazi society.
But thats a different topic. USA secretly smuggled Nazi scientists, some of whom could have been easily convicted of war crimes, in USA. And other things. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_paperclip |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
| quote: | Originally posted by Magnetonium
UK was certainly not that badly bombed, there's a reason why they won the air war. They'd be done already if they were that destroyed. In any way, the number of German civilians who were killed by Allied bombing is way more staggering! You remember what the Allies did to Dresden?
Oh, and it doesnt matter what the oppressive Jap leadership did in China, well it certianly matters, but in this case - it doesnt give any justificiation for USA to drop TWO, not ONE, nuclear weapons on innocent civilians. At least Japs military were criminals. Does USA have to go down to their standards too? I thought USA was much more civilized and had some political compromise skills that they bragged about. And all that went up in smoke of a mushroom cloud. |
Um.
Hello?
They were at WAR.
It's obvious you have no concept of what it takes to win one.
It's a no holds barred of one country against another AT ALL COSTS.
You want to minimize your own casualties while ending the war, FAST.
That's exactly WHY they did it.
Don't think for a second they that didn't think of the consequences of their actions.
Was it horrible? Yes.
Did it stop the war? Yes.
Was it worth it? Absolutely, and in the end, saved millions more lives than those two bombs ever took. |
|
|
| Magnetonium |
| quote: | Originally posted by Fir3start3r
Um.
Hello?
They were at WAR.
It's obvious you have no concept of what it takes to win one.
It's a no holds barred of one country against another AT ALL COSTS.
You want to minimize your own casualties while ending the war, FAST.
That's exactly WHY they did it.
Don't think for a second they that didn't think of the consequences of their actions.
Was it horrible? Yes.
Did it stop the war? Yes.
Was it worth it? Absolutely, and in the end, saved millions more lives than those two bombs ever took. |
I would still disagree.
Basically you said it was OK that USA lowered itself to the Japanese military criminals levels and used a terrible weapon without using the language of dimplomacy first. No excuse for dropping a nuclear weapon. And no excuse for Japanese war atrocities either.
In any case, even if Americans wanted an quicker end to the war - but I will never ever accept that it was the right decision to drop the second nuclear bomb, only days after the first one. American military instead of settling for peace decided to use this terrible weapon to force Japs to surrender.
Oh, and by the way, it was the Americans who armed the Japanese and with American weapons did the Japs commit all the crimes.
Just like the Americans sold military equipment to Nazis before they joined the war. Thats why they were reluctant to enter the war in first place. |
|
|
|
|
