Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

When is it ok?!


  • Please log in to reply
32 replies to this topic

Poll: Is it ever ok to use a nuke on another country? (22 member(s) have cast votes)

Is it ever ok to use a nuke on another country?

  1. It would never be ok. (16 votes [72.73%])

    Percentage of vote: 72.73%

  2. It would be ok if … (6 votes [27.27%])

    Percentage of vote: 27.27%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1    4dplane

4dplane

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 493 posts
  • Joined:12 May 2004

  • To study where I stand, teaches me what I have been missing.

Posted 17 February 2005 - 05:48 AM

When is it ok to use a nuke on another country? Any size big or small, is it ever ok? In what case scenario would you feel justified in using a nuke on another country?

Any belief is a self protecting device through which the mind disconnects itself from truth. Only a mind that is free from any anticipation, hope, and belief can act justly and in alliance with truth and reality.
-Krishnamurti

Most people are bothered by those passages of Scripture they do not understand, but the passages that bother me are those I do understand.
-Mark Twan

#2    bathory

bathory

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 5,302 posts
  • Joined:20 Nov 2003
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia

Posted 17 February 2005 - 06:21 AM

if they initiate nuclear warfare first
great rule of thumb:)

i guess the idea is that if they want to wipe us off the face of the earth, we'll return the favor and/or make sure there isn't much earth left for them in the end:P




#3    Mad Manfred

Mad Manfred

    Cutesy Wootsy

  • Member
  • 4,505 posts
  • Joined:03 Jun 2004
  • Location:Tinkly-Winkly Town

Posted 17 February 2005 - 06:34 AM

It's never ok.

The fallout kills everything and leaves the affected land uninhabitable for all kinds of life, not just humans, for a century.


#4    tigger

tigger

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,367 posts
  • Joined:24 Feb 2004
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:the land-down under..can you hear the thunder?

  • keeper of a greater magic... THE SCHWARTZ!

Posted 17 February 2005 - 07:51 AM

and also the fact of the earths prevailing wind pattern, sheds a lot more radioactive waste further than just the area that has been bombed

there never is a good reason

'What do you do if you step on a mine, Captain?'
'Well, the usual procedure is to leap 200 feet in the air and spread yourself over a wide area…'


Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, Champagne in one hand - strawberries in the other, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming WOO HOO - What a Ride!

#5    Fluffybunny

Fluffybunny

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,136 posts
  • Joined:24 Oct 2003
  • Gender:Male

  • "Of all the tyrannies that affect mankind, tyranny in religion is the worst."
    Thomas Paine

Posted 17 February 2005 - 08:14 AM

I agree with Bathory...for once...

It is a last resort. If a nuclear country decides that they are going to strike first, about the only thing you can do is to nuke their nuclear facilities in order to keep as many missles from being launched as possible. I would only attack military targets, I would never go for population centers; just strictly military targets that would minimize the attack and damage on our side.

I think that having nukes are deterent enough to make it a non issue...

Too many people on both sides of the spectrum have fallen into this mentality that a full one half of the country are the enemy for having different beliefs...in a country based on freedom of expression. It is this infighting that allows the focus to be taken away from "we the people" being able to watch, and have control over government corruption and ineptitude that is running rampant in our leadership.

People should be working towards fixing problems, not creating them.

#6    Kismit

Kismit

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,680 posts
  • Joined:02 Nov 2001
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:New zealand

Posted 17 February 2005 - 09:25 AM

And I really like the idea of not using nuclear weapons at all. Never, ever, ever. In fact I would really like to see a return to stick and rock throwing.


#7    Homer

Homer

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,814 posts
  • Joined:16 Mar 2001
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida

Posted 17 February 2005 - 12:09 PM

QUOTE(Kismit @ Feb 17 2005, 05:25 AM)
And I really like the idea of not using nuclear weapons at all. Never, ever, ever. In fact I would really like to see a return to stick and rock throwing.

View Post


I like swords and lances, like medieval knights original.gif

To answer the question, I also agree with bathory. To think that the only punishment a country that has just nuked us would be that the winds carry the radiation back to them isn't enough. Nuke 'em back! I think using nukes as a counterstrike against a nuclear attack on you is the only valid reason for using them.

אַ֭תָּה אֱלֹהֵ֣י יִשְׁעִ֑י

#8    warden

warden

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,751 posts
  • Joined:10 Dec 2004
  • Location:scotland midlothian

Posted 17 February 2005 - 12:14 PM

When you have went through all diplomatic chanells and  have the backing from most of the worlds leaders....those leaders with NUKS


#9    aquatus1

aquatus1

    Forum Divinity

  • 19,151 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2004
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 17 February 2005 - 01:34 PM

The only reason I can think to use a nuke would be against a biological agent, not a people.  A nuke is limited in the damage that it does, whereas a biological agent has a good chance of spreading globally.


#10    Vallheru

Vallheru

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 225 posts
  • Joined:11 Feb 2005
  • Location:Midkemia

  • Use the fork Luke...use the fork.

Posted 17 February 2005 - 01:50 PM


When reffering to nukes, please firts open a book about Hiroshima and Nagashaki and then post your opinions.

There was a reason why no one else has used nukes on people ever since and those 2 cities are the reason.

Also notice that it is always a taboo subject for Hollywood as we have never seen a movie about Hiroshima or Nagashaki. Have you ever thought why? Apart from the fact that it would be amazingly gruesome (the actual facts far exceed the scariest scenes ever recorded in cinema...) it is obvious that there is an enormous amount of guilt involved. All other incidents of all wars have been filmed, except this one, which is of course the greatest war-moment in human history.

So, there is absolutely no way a human should ever again even think of using a nuke, for any reason at all. And, personally I don't think anyone will ever do again.

If we get invaded from aliens.....hell, nuke the bastards!!! original.gif



#11    warden

warden

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,751 posts
  • Joined:10 Dec 2004
  • Location:scotland midlothian

Posted 17 February 2005 - 02:07 PM

QUOTE(Vallheru @ Feb 17 2005, 01:50 PM)
When reffering to nukes, please firts open a book about Hiroshima and Nagashaki and then post your opinions.

There was a reason why no one else has used nukes on people ever since and those 2 cities are the reason.

Also notice that it is always a taboo subject for Hollywood as we have never seen a movie about Hiroshima or Nagashaki. Have you ever thought why? Apart from the fact that it would be amazingly gruesome (the actual facts far exceed the scariest scenes ever recorded in cinema...) it is obvious that there is an enormous amount of guilt involved. All other incidents of all wars have been filmed, except this one, which is of course the greatest war-moment in human history.

So, there is absolutely no way a human should ever again even think of using a nuke, for any reason at all. And, personally I don't think anyone will ever do again.

If we get invaded from aliens.....hell, nuke the bastards!!! original.gif

View Post



I dont think in my life time i will see another Hir or Nag,i hope not ,they have been a good deterent since then

About the aliens,who`s to say they aren`t all ready here,they could be the ones who have the fingers on the buttons


#12    star_child

star_child

    Killer Queen

  • Member
  • 4,213 posts
  • Joined:17 Jan 2005
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Northern Ireland

  • dare you to do what you want, dare you to be who you will

Posted 17 February 2005 - 04:18 PM

Never.

Without reason, its called 'Terrorism'
Without a valid reason, its called 'War'.
To me, they are the same things. MURDER

Edited by star_child, 17 February 2005 - 04:19 PM.

Posted Image

Created by Janiel, with a little love!

Meat's No Treat For Those You Eat!

#13    aquatus1

aquatus1

    Forum Divinity

  • 19,151 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2004
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 17 February 2005 - 06:06 PM

So...using a nuke to destroy a released biological weapon would be considered murder?


#14    star_child

star_child

    Killer Queen

  • Member
  • 4,213 posts
  • Joined:17 Jan 2005
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Northern Ireland

  • dare you to do what you want, dare you to be who you will

Posted 17 February 2005 - 06:25 PM

same applies to biological weapons. If you use those against nukes, then it is war. right?

Posted Image

Created by Janiel, with a little love!

Meat's No Treat For Those You Eat!

#15    aquatus1

aquatus1

    Forum Divinity

  • 19,151 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2004
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 17 February 2005 - 06:33 PM

How could you use a biological weapon against a nuke?  The tremendous heat from a nuclear blast would eradicate any biological agent, but a biological agent wouldn't stop a nuclear reaction.

Ultimately, would the eradication of a harmful biological agent be considered a valid reason to use a nuclear weapon?

Edited by aquatus1, 17 February 2005 - 06:34 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users