- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Crimea crisis shows the dangers of nuclear disarmament
Posted on 4/10/14 at 8:12 pm
Posted on 4/10/14 at 8:12 pm
Until 2009, Ukraine had nuclear weapons. If they had nuclear weapons today, I think it's pretty safe to say that Russia would not have attempted to annex any of it's territory.
I am all for identifying, tracking and securing any and all nuclear weapons. As a community of nations we are all invested in making sure that a nuke doesn't end up in the wrong hands, and I think we would all agree that everything that can be done to that end should be done. I can also understand the United States, in an effort to foster an easing any tensions and promoting goodwill, to reduce the overall number of nukes in our arsenal when it can be done without sacrificing our strategic needs. But ultimately MAD has been the greatest peacekeeper in the history of mankind, and all you have to do is look at the shitshow going on in the Ukraine right now to understand why.
I am all for identifying, tracking and securing any and all nuclear weapons. As a community of nations we are all invested in making sure that a nuke doesn't end up in the wrong hands, and I think we would all agree that everything that can be done to that end should be done. I can also understand the United States, in an effort to foster an easing any tensions and promoting goodwill, to reduce the overall number of nukes in our arsenal when it can be done without sacrificing our strategic needs. But ultimately MAD has been the greatest peacekeeper in the history of mankind, and all you have to do is look at the shitshow going on in the Ukraine right now to understand why.
11
Posted on 4/10/14 at 8:15 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:They gave up nukes in a protection agreement.
Until 2009, Ukraine had nuclear weapons. If they had nuclear weapons today, I think it's pretty safe to say that Russia would not have attempted to annex any of it's territory.
That didn't work out well, Captain Hindsight would have kept the nukes.
Posted on 4/10/14 at 8:21 pm to Draconian Sanctions
Posted on 4/10/14 at 8:23 pm to Draconian Sanctions
Is this the beginning justification to allow Iran to have nukes?
Posted on 4/10/14 at 8:26 pm to C
quote:
Is this the beginning justification to allow Iran to have nukes?
How much do you know about Iran? They wouldn't even crack the top 3 most likely countries to start a nuclear exchange.
Did you realize that their "President" that we heard so much about over here due to his rhetoric is actually like 17th in line for power and wasn't even liked much at home for his extremist views?
This post was edited on 4/10/14 at 8:27 pm
Posted on 4/10/14 at 8:26 pm to C
I thing DS is trying to drag a top water bait on the surface to get a conservative to agree because he has something loaded as a masterful point once he gets a bite.
Will not bite.
Will not bite.
Posted on 4/10/14 at 8:27 pm to Scoop
quote:
I thing DS is trying to drag a top water bait on the surface to get a conservative to agree because he has something loaded as a masterful point once he gets a bite.
believe it or not, i agree with traditional "conservatives" on this issue.
Posted on 4/10/14 at 8:32 pm to Draconian Sanctions
Nukes for true democracies. No nukes for tiny tyrants with Napoleonic syndrome.
Posted on 4/10/14 at 8:38 pm to Draconian Sanctions
So that's a yeS
Posted on 4/10/14 at 8:39 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
Until 2009, Ukraine had nuclear weapons. If they had nuclear weapons today, I think it's pretty safe to say that Russia would not have attempted to annex any of it's territory.
I am all for identifying, tracking and securing any and all nuclear weapons. As a community of nations we are all invested in making sure that a nuke doesn't end up in the wrong hands, and I think we would all agree that everything that can be done to that end should be done. I can also understand the United States, in an effort to foster an easing any tensions and promoting goodwill, to reduce the overall number of nukes in our arsenal when it can be done without sacrificing our strategic needs. But ultimately MAD has been the greatest peacekeeper in the history of mankind, and all you have to do is look at the shitshow going on in the Ukraine right now to understand why.
I actually agree with everything you posted.
I would point out that MAD only works when you are dealing with people who have survival as a top priority. Many of the terrorist couldn't care less about survival if it means taking out the infidel.
An Iran with a nuke would not react the way nations under MAD have historically acted.
Posted on 4/10/14 at 8:39 pm to Jimbeaux
quote:
Nukes for true democracies.
So when is the U.S. giving up our nukes?
Posted on 4/10/14 at 8:50 pm to Wally Sparks
quote:I guess after the 2016 election cycle if the ship isn't righted. Another liberal president after the Obama years of corruption, lies, incompetence, and liberal government apparatchiks fully installed with no voter push back of the pendulum will no doubt spell doom for freedom in this country. I don't see any way we could recover. The nukes won't be given up, even though we should no longer be trusted with them.
So when is the U.S. giving up our nukes?
Posted on 4/10/14 at 8:58 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
They wouldn't even crack the top 3 most likely countries to start a nuclear exchange.
A most bold and unsubstantiated claim.
Posted on 4/10/14 at 8:58 pm to Draconian Sanctions
the issue with Iran (and others) is whose hands might the nukes fall into.
the middle east seems a more fluid situation than other countries.
I do agree with your overall premise however; nuclear weapons are responsible for the longest period of overall "peace" the civilized world has seen.
the middle east seems a more fluid situation than other countries.
I do agree with your overall premise however; nuclear weapons are responsible for the longest period of overall "peace" the civilized world has seen.
Posted on 4/10/14 at 8:58 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
Until 2009, Ukraine had nuclear weapons. If they had nuclear weapons today, I think it's pretty safe to say that Russia would not have attempted to annex any of it's territory.
probably not
quote:
I am all for identifying, tracking and securing any and all nuclear weapons. As a community of nations we are all invested in making sure that a nuke doesn't end up in the wrong hands, and I think we would all agree that everything that can be done to that end should be done. I can also understand the United States, in an effort to foster an easing any tensions and promoting goodwill, to reduce the overall number of nukes in our arsenal when it can be done without sacrificing our strategic needs. But ultimately MAD has been the greatest peacekeeper in the history of mankind, and all you have to do is look at the shitshow going on in the Ukraine right now to understand why.
What do you consider the wrong hands? I for one consider an nation that has threatened to wipe another nation off the face of the earth (Iran)or threatens other nations with nuclear war and have crazy dictators that have lil pecker syndrome (NK) the wrong hands.
Posted on 4/10/14 at 8:59 pm to Draconian Sanctions
I'm convinced that we possess some sort of weapon(s) that make an atomic bomb look like child's play, for some reason.
Posted on 4/10/14 at 9:01 pm to C
quote:Iran is justified in having nukes because Israel has them and the US has them. And both countries have threaten military strikes against Iran several times.
Is this the beginning justification to allow Iran to have nukes?
Posted on 4/10/14 at 9:02 pm to willthezombie
quote:Based on what?
probably not
Posted on 4/10/14 at 9:05 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
believe it or not, i agree with traditional "conservatives" on this issue.
That holding shotguns to each others heads makes us all behave more reasonable?
And this is the way to go for the future?
Posted on 4/10/14 at 9:06 pm to JazzyJeff
quote:
Iran is justified in having nukes because Israel has them and the US has them. And both countries have threaten military strikes against Iran several times.
only because Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons and has made statements that it wants to wipe Israel off the face of the earth.
Page 1 of 2
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News