[quote=Gonzo][quote=fishingnut]And why the fuck are we trying to force "our" values on the world regarding nuclear weapons? WE'RE the hypocrite fucks who USED the bomb, and killed like 140,000 innocent civilians.

cause they are bad plan and simple, it doesn't make a difference if we used them or not. we haven't used them since. and noone should have them.[/quote]

They are bad plain and simple? That's not even an answer my friend... That has a sociological explanation... we always see the fundamentalism in the "other", and we try to kill that "other" not realizing that we're comitting a "fundamentalism" act... silencing the "other" to make the world more similar to "our" point of view. Killing fundamentalism, is an act of fundamentalism (even bigger).

.[/quote]

what you don't agree the nuclear bombs are bad. do you feel that every nation should have them cause the US has them.

what sociological explanation. you lost me on that one.

I just think that If USA has Nuclear Weapons, they can't force every other nation not to have them. It's something like: "do what I say, and don't do what I do".

so you feel it's ok that iran or irak or syria or any other wacky nation out there that has no stability you think it is ok for them to have nuclear weapons? cause i think that's crazy. but that's just me

and the us has not built any new nuclear weapons in years. as i thought they where trying to reduce them. and so where the rest of the old super powers

No, I think it's wrong to have nuclear weapons... but I think it's worse that USA wants every other country without nukes, while they have (USA) nuclear weapons. It's stupid... come on, United States should dismantle its own bombs before asking / forcing other people to dismantle theirs.

And... my friend, you have just said something that examples what I said in my "sociological" explanation about fundamentalism. Why you think Syria, Iran or Irak ar wacky nations? Can't you see that the fact of them being different doesn't make those nations Wacky? Do you think USA isn't wacky trying to disarm every fucking country while they have nukes? Isn't USA wacky... killing thousands of innocent civilians for a false cause, in name of God and liberty? Isn't USA wacky, using the fear for death with its citizens as a political instrument to cut off rights and liberty from people? That Leviathan is getting stronger with the liberty that citizens gives to him... and the fact is that you have no notice about it.

i ment wacky= not stabile

sorry that i didn't spell it out for you.

i didn't mean it in any other way.

and the US is dismantling the nuclear weapon program they have been for years now.

[quote=Gonzo] Isn't USA wacky, using the fear for death with its citizens as a political instrument to cut off rights and liberty from people?.[/quote]

isn't your country guilty of this also

[quote=fishingnut][quote=Gonzo] Isn't USA wacky, using the fear for death with its citizens as a political instrument to cut off rights and liberty from people?.[/quote]

isn't your country guilty of this also[/quote]

Why do you think my country is guilty for that?

He refers to the military dicatatorships your country has had in the past: they did the same thing. (Farrell, Videla)

Though he's making the wrong equation here: the US is supposed to be a democratic country, but not acting like it. Argentina didn't pretend to be democratic at the time... :wink:

Most of the people didn't support the dictatorships here in Argentina, they took power ilegally...

I think Bush has at least more than the half of USA's inhabitants supporting him... but that's not the point. We don't have nukes, nor ask other people to dismantle their own.

[quote=Yao]He refers to the military dicatatorships your country has had in the past: they did the same thing. (Farrell, Videla)

Though he's making the wrong equation here: the US is supposed to be a democratic country, but not acting like it. Argentina didn't pretend to be democratic at the time... :wink:[/quote]

yes true, sorry about that

gonzo i don't understand. so if a country was able to buy the technolgy to build the weapons, you think it's ok and they should build as many as they want.

and second again general asumption that the US is the only country in this world that is asking other nations to stop building nuclear weapons is not true. so please do alittle more research on this.

[quote=fishingnut]gonzo i don't understand. so if a country was able to buy the technolgy to build the weapons, you think it's ok and they should build as many as they want.

and second again general asumption that the US is the only country in this world that is asking other nations to stop building nuclear weapons is not true. so please do alittle more research on this.[/quote]

No, that's now what I say, my friend... I think is not right to build nukes, but I don't agree, at all, with USA forcing other countries to dismantle their weapons while they already have nukes. Let's supose USA is your / my father, telling you / me not to do drugs, while he's a drug addict... you might think: "why the hell is telling me that? He does drugs a lot more than me! HE shouldn't be a drug addict in order to ask me to quit 'em..."; Can you see the point? USA shouldn't have nukes, so that would justify its purpose of asking / forcing other countries no to have Nuclear Weapons.

Second, the topic is about an american lieutenant who wrote a weird letter... that's why we are only referring to USA, the topic drove us to talk about that country only.

if my father was a drug addict, and he he told me not to do drugs cause you see what happens when people do drugs, i think i would listen to him. and i think you would to.but i might be wrong.. i am not a persons who feels i have to have something or do something because everyone else does it or has it.

its not about that though.

we aren't forcing other countries to disarm cause it's wrong, we are just enforcing our military dominance. it's different.

[quote=fishingnut]if my father was a drug addict, and he he told me not to do drugs cause you see what happens when people do drugs, i think i would listen to him. and i think you would to.but i might be wrong.. i am not a persons who feels i have to have something or do something because everyone else does it or has it. [/quote]

You didn't got me on that, you missunderstood... When I made the addiction father example, I was trying to say that USA has no moral authority to force others to dismantle their bombs, as USA already has bombs. It's like what I've said in other posts: "Do what I say, but don't do what I do"; I think it's a contradiction to force other to dismantle their nukes in the name of peace, while you still have Nuclear weapons.

[quote=face]its not about that though.

we aren't forcing other countries to disarm cause it's wrong, we are just enforcing our military dominance. it's different.[/quote]

I totally agree with the military dominance enforcement.

your talking like the US is still building there nuclear weapons program, which they haven't been for many years now. if anything they have been trying to reduce the number of weapons they have. and so has everyone else. yes i understand your point now it, but still don't understand the logic.

it maybe that we have stopped focusing on building more nuclear weapons. however, don't doubt for a second that we are developing all sorts of alternative weapons [of mass destruction, if you will] the likes of which you never heard of before. our defense budget alone could probably feed and educate all of the starving nations of the world, and some change left over.

it's not just about the nukes. remember the sex bombs??? lol

[quote=face]it maybe that we have stopped focusing on building more nuclear weapons. however, don't doubt for a second that we are developing all sorts of alternative weapons [of mass destruction, if you will] the likes of which you never heard of before. our defense budget alone could probably feed and educate all of the starving nations of the world, and some change left over.

it's not just about the nukes. remember the sex bombs??? lol[/quote]

very true, but i'd rather have the sex bomb than the nuke

:CrackUp:

Would that be a nice bomb to take...

I agree with the logic from Gonzo, though Face may be right: It could be all about enforcing military dominance rather than doing it 'for the good of the planet'.

I'm not comfortable with N-Korea and Iran having/developing Nukes, but I ain't comfy either with the US trying to control other countries on that.

Let's dismantle Tom Jones' Sex bomb! :Naughty:

waita minute!

white hindu, i dont wanna call you out, but you honestly we attacked Japan w/out cause??? have you ever heard of Pearl Habor? thats what got us into it with japan, we were actually in peace talks withthem b4 they flipped on us. the bomb was used to send the STOP message b4 we had to have the allies do a full scale invasion on the japanese islands, which was deemed to costly for the military after the european campaign :|

[quote=Gonzo]Let's dismantle Tom Jones' Sex bomb! :Naughty:[/quote]

Hope it is a cluster sex bomb. :WinkNSmi:

Well I don't think that Truman was using very good judgment when he dropped a bomb on 120,000 innocent civilians. America tries to say all this shit about how the bomb is bad. Ironically, America is the ONLY COUNTRY EVER to nuke another country. Also, America has more nukes than anyone else.

Let's lead by example. I move that we bury all the nukes on the moon.

Poor Moon... If they explode, I'm sure that will make a HUGE crater.

The only crater would be caused by the C4, which would create an explosion considerably smaller than one on Earth, mainly because the moon lacks an atmosphere, hence a lack of air, the prime medium of not only fire, but of nuclear fission.

[quote=White_Hindu] Let's lead by example. I move that we bury all the nukes on the moon.[/quote]

A better idea would be to send the shit to the sun since it is essentially a nuclear reactor, but the liability is in getting into space. Just think if something goes wrong launching it into space. Now if they could build that space elevator we might get somewhere. And while were at it we could send the stuff buried at Yucca and Hanford. It just crazy that we are trying to figure out how to mark the containers of waste in such a way that a future civilization will know not to open them since they will still be harmful in 10000 + years.

I was thinking of the sending nukes to the sun, but I don't know how that would affect the gravitational pull in our solar system(it could be catastrophic) so I decided to send them to the moon where they wouldn't explode.

Or just fly em straight out of our solar system: let the aliens deal with the shit :mrgreen:

Let the alien pay for it, they keep visiting us without paying fees nor taxes! :mrgreen:

they could send em out on a timer and just have em detonate in empty space.

However, as sad as it is, we do indeed need to keep a few of them on this planet, god forbid. but i do think that the UN should keep them in a secret place and have a multi national group maintain the detonators. lord knows that military technolgy is capable of more than it was in the '40's and if it comes down to risking thousands and thousands of lives for a never ending war or using a nuke again to end it immediately like we did in WW2 , i think using the nuke is warrented. :?

Looks like Stewie is already working on it ^^^^ Is that a spaceshuttle on the right?

I think so...

I'm sorry that people with fortunate upbringings think they have a valid view of international issues. I'm sorry that people believe everything they see in the media. I'm sorry no body sees through Michael Moore. I'm sorry Americans were stupid enough to vote for Bush twice and then cry foul when the guy retakes office. I'm sorry that American peace keepers work tirelessy around the world to settle the childish battles of less "civilized" peoples without thanks. I'm sorry that some people have to make big decisions that are going to polarize a nation. I'm sorry that the truth can only ever be known to a selected few. I'm sorry I think the beheading of innocent civilians is one of the most barbaric acts imaginable.

I bet this letter is not legit. Seems like one of those things that makes it's way across the internet with no validation. I can't find links from any prominent new site yet.

[quote=White_Hindu]The only crater would be caused by the C4, which would create an explosion considerably smaller than one on Earth, mainly because the moon lacks an atmosphere, hence a lack of air, the prime medium of not only fire, but of nuclear fission...

...I was thinking of the sending nukes to the sun, but I don't know how that would affect the gravitational pull in our solar system(it could be catastrophic) so I decided to send them to the moon where they wouldn't explode.[/quote]

What? Neither of these things are in the least bit true.

No matter how many nuclear bombs we sent into the sun, they'd be digested pretty much as if nothing happened. The sun converts 4 million tons of hydrogen into energy every second using similar reactions to a nuclear bomb, which obviously ways a bit less than 4 million tons.

Second, air is not any part of a nuclear reaction. Sure, the fires afterward require air, but a nuclear reaction doesn't. In fact, there usually isn't much fire afterwards, especially near ground zero, because the explosion itself burns up all the oxygen in the area. Not much fuel left for a fire. Blowing up a bunch of nuclear bombs on the moon would certainly do a lot of damage.

blowing up a few on the moon could severly alter its rotation and orbit.

[quote=thesightless]blowing up a few on the moon could severly alter its rotation and orbit.[/quote]

That's for sure. I think it would take a lot of them, though, to alter the orbit. Not thousands, but maybe dozens.

Either way, it wouldn't be harmless, that's for sure.