Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

New restrictions for the use of nuclear weapons


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> New restrictions for the use of nuclear weapons Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
New restrictions for the use of nuclear weapons - 4/7/2010 8:46:51 PM   
takemeforyourown


Posts: 430
Joined: 2/24/2007
Status: offline 		I don't have a link on hand, but I would like to hear your thoughts on President Obama's new restrictions on the U.S.'s use of nuclear weapons.

I am conflicted. My peace-loving hippie side says that's a step in the right direction, my former Army officer side says that he just gave a bunch of bad people an invitation to attack us.


Edited for spelling

< Message edited by takemeforyourown -- 4/7/2010 8:48:56 PM >
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: New restrictions for the use of nuclear weapons - 4/7/2010 8:54:51 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline 		US to adopt narrower policy on using nuclear arms

Already a topic on the board, just seems to have little interest

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to takemeforyourown)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: New restrictions for the use of nuclear weapons - 4/7/2010 9:03:04 PM   
takemeforyourown


Posts: 430
Joined: 2/24/2007
Status: offline 		Oh. Sorry. But can we revive it then? I can't believe I'm the only one thinking about this.

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: New restrictions for the use of nuclear weapons - 4/7/2010 11:15:19 PM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: takemeforyourown

I don't have a link on hand, but I would like to hear your thoughts on President Obama's new restrictions on the U.S.'s use of nuclear weapons.

I am conflicted. My peace-loving hippie side says that's a step in the right direction, my former Army officer side says that he just gave a bunch of bad people an invitation to attack us.


Edited for spelling


the reality is that its like the WWF.

Its all smoke and mirrors and when the show is over they all sit around and laugh at what a good show they put on and pat each other on the back while drinking beer.


_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to takemeforyourown)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: New restrictions for the use of nuclear weapons - 4/8/2010 4:53:53 AM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline 		Not beer, champaigne.

Self imposed restrictions are total BS. Any limit can be exceeded, and self imposed ones are the most prone.

I am the fox, I promise not to eat your hens. Believe me (?)

T

(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: New restrictions for the use of nuclear weapons - 4/8/2010 7:20:22 AM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline
Precisely. Hollow, meaningless words on a teleprompter screen, and nothing more.


_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: New restrictions for the use of nuclear weapons - 4/8/2010 7:35:58 AM   
RacerJim


Posts: 1583
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: takemeforyourown

I don't have a link on hand, but I would like to hear your thoughts on President Obama's new restrictions on the U.S.'s use of nuclear weapons.

I am conflicted. My peace-loving hippie side says that's a step in the right direction, my former Army officer side says that he just gave a bunch of bad people an invitation to attack us.


Edited for spelling


First and foremost, thank you for your military service!

My 60's hippie side also says that's a step in the right direction, but my former Army enlisted and realist side says he just told any/all of America's current and/or future enemies that we won't nuke them into oblivion after they have biologically and/or chemically relagated us to extinction.

(in reply to takemeforyourown)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: New restrictions for the use of nuclear weapons - 4/8/2010 7:37:32 AM   
RacerJim


Posts: 1583
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: takemeforyourown

Oh. Sorry. But can we revive it then? I can't believe I'm the only one thinking about this.


Fret not my dear...you most definitely are not the only one thinking about this.

(in reply to takemeforyourown)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: New restrictions for the use of nuclear weapons - 4/8/2010 7:37:49 AM   
Smutmonger


Posts: 995
Joined: 2/17/2010
Status: offline 		Menas nothing as long as we still have the firebirds. Retaliation is automatic in case of an attack on us.

_____________________________

I didn't get into an alternative lifestyle to explore new frontiers in conformity.

(in reply to takemeforyourown)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: New restrictions for the use of nuclear weapons - 4/8/2010 7:43:03 AM   
RacerJim


Posts: 1583
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


Precisely. Hollow, meaningless words on a teleprompter screen, and nothing more.



Given Obama's anti-American and anti-war background, this is one area where I believe he meant/means every word.

(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: New restrictions for the use of nuclear weapons - 4/8/2010 7:43:48 AM   
Jeffff


Posts: 12600
Joined: 7/7/2007
Status: offline 		You are a jag off

_____________________________

"If you don't live it, it won't come out your horn." Charlie Parker

(in reply to RacerJim)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: New restrictions for the use of nuclear weapons - 4/8/2010 2:11:29 PM   
popeye1250


Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

Not beer, champaigne.

Self imposed restrictions are total BS. Any limit can be exceeded, and self imposed ones are the most prone.

I am the fox, I promise not to eat your hens. Believe me (?)

T


Yeah, that's like having a sign on your front door; "This house protected by Smith and Wesson."
("But, we may or may not use it.")
I just don't think Obama is up to the job. By his own admission all he's ever done is, " push paper."
This is about the *protection of the United States.* You don't ever tell potential adversaries what you "won't" do! You never "give" the enemy *anything!*
This guy should have stayed in academia. He's turning out to be all sizzle and no steak. And now his competance is comming into question.
He's made a lot of bad decisions in the last 15 months. He's no "manager" that's for sure.

_____________________________

"But Your Honor, this is not a Jury of my Peers, these people are all decent, honest, law-abiding citizens!"

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: New restrictions for the use of nuclear weapons - 4/8/2010 2:51:29 PM   
Targetarear


Posts: 6
Joined: 3/25/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: takemeforyourown

I am conflicted. My peace-loving hippie side says that's a step in the right direction, my former Army officer side says that he just gave a bunch of bad people an invitation to attack us.


Edited for spelling


Don't worry. Even after reducing their weapons by one third, I believe Russia and the USA will still each have enough nukes to destroy the whole world.

And the reduction isn't all it seems anyway. I heard on BBC News this morning that a nuclear bomber will be counted as one nuclear warhead, even though modern bombers can carry many Cruise missiles that have nuclear warheads.

The people who should worry most are those in Europe, because the USA has agreed it will not use nuclear weapons first against any country that has signed up to the Non-proliferation Treaty, and has complied with its obligations under that treaty, even if that country uses chemical or biological weapons.

That means Europe is no longer shielded by the USA's "nuclear umbrella". Although Russia, at the moment, seems indisposed to aggressive or expansionist policies, that might not always be the case. A future militant Russian government could safely send its tanks rolling through Europe, stopping only at the English Channel, without the risk of a nuclear first strike from the USA.

As a UK citizen whose attitude to our "special relationship" with the USA has always been ambivelant, I beleive that relationship is now dead - if it were ever really alive, except in the mind of Sir Winston Churchill - and the time has come to join with France, the only European country with a truly independent nuclear deterrent, to provide a European nuclear umbrella.

Although I could imagine nothing better than the elimination of all nuclear weapons, the truth is we let the genie out of the bottle in July 1945, and, try as we might, we can never put it back in. Even if all nuclear weapons in the world were to be disarmed and destroyed tomorrow, the knowledge of how to build them again would remain, and the risk that at some time in the future some unscrupulous "politician" might take advantage of that knowledge is just too great to ignore. (Could we have trusted Adolf Hitler not to have used nuclear weapons had he possessed them? Somehow, I don't think so).

So my advice to you is to follow the instincts of your Army Officer side; much safer, however sad or guilty your hippy side might feel as a result. (I have a hippy side too, so I know exactly how you feel).

Target.

_____________________________

What is this life, if, full of care, we have no time to spank a rear.

(in reply to takemeforyourown)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: New restrictions for the use of nuclear weapons - 4/8/2010 2:55:34 PM   
LiveFreeAndSpank


Posts: 33
Joined: 11/9/2009
Status: offline
Pip Pip and wish you well with that UK/France thing....

(in reply to Targetarear)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: New restrictions for the use of nuclear weapons - 4/8/2010 6:11:11 PM   
slvemike4u


Posts: 17896
Joined: 1/15/2008
From: United States
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


Precisely. Hollow, meaningless words on a teleprompter screen, and nothing more.

So when a Democrat,any Democrat it would seem,anounces a change in U.S. policy from the office of the President...they are "Hollow,meaningless words"?
How so? And tell me this if Bush had made this same pronouncement would you not be here hailing him as a great peacemaker and the light unto the world?

_____________________________

If we want things to stay as they are,things will have to change...Tancredi from "the Leopard"

Forget Guns-----Ban the pools

Funny stuff....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNwFf991d-4


(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: New restrictions for the use of nuclear weapons - 4/8/2010 8:06:36 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
quote:

Don't worry. Even after reducing their weapons by one third, I believe Russia and the USA will still each have enough nukes to destroy the whole world.


Several times over.

Besides, if all nuclear weapons vanished tomorrow, we'd still have a tremendous advantage in conventional forces.

People have to get over this irrational fear of the world. It costs a damn lot of money that doesn't actually make us safe.

(in reply to Targetarear)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: New restrictions for the use of nuclear weapons - 4/8/2010 8:13:06 PM   
Thadius


Posts: 5091
Joined: 10/11/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

Don't worry. Even after reducing their weapons by one third, I believe Russia and the USA will still each have enough nukes to destroy the whole world.


Several times over.

Besides, if all nuclear weapons vanished tomorrow, we'd still have a tremendous advantage in conventional forces.

People have to get over this irrational fear of the world. It costs a damn lot of money that doesn't actually make us safe.

Ah, but you got to admit it made for some fun. I actually miss having a big rival like the Soviet Union, it seemed to keep the inbred folks focused on something other than how to bed their sister, well maybe not that distracted, but you know what I mean.

My only concern with the new policy is the outright announcing of what qualifies for the use of our arsenal, or I guess more accurately what no longer qualifies. It may be enough to remove any fear that some whackjob might have had prior to the changes.

I do like the idea behind the change, which I believe to try to move towards a more peaceful world, I am just not so sure about the execution. Time will tell.

_____________________________

When the character of a man is not clear to you, look at his friends." ~ Japanese Proverb

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: New restrictions for the use of nuclear weapons - 4/8/2010 10:27:52 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline 		After reading the document I think this is a tempest in a teapot.

The US is saying that if a country is a signatory to the nonproliferation treaty and is living up to its obligations under that treaty we won't nuke them. It does include a caveat stating that in case of CBW attack we might change our minds. Since no terroist group could possibly be part of the NPT and the rogue states that sponsor terrorists are either not in the NPT or are not in compliance with it the chances that a CBW attack on the US could not be met with a nuclear counterattack approach nil.

http://www.defense.gov/npr/docs/2010%20Nuclear%20Posture%20Review%20Report.pdf

(in reply to Thadius)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: New restrictions for the use of nuclear weapons - 4/8/2010 10:32:39 PM   
Thadius


Posts: 5091
Joined: 10/11/2005
Status: offline 		You could be right on that. Like I said the execution of the announcement is more of what I have an issue with, the concept seems to be sound. I was more worried about the whackos to be tempted to go after an ally, as opposed to an actual attack on the US itself. This could be a great feather in the cap of the new administration.

_____________________________

When the character of a man is not clear to you, look at his friends." ~ Japanese Proverb

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: New restrictions for the use of nuclear weapons - 4/8/2010 10:33:46 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline 		"It does include a caveat stating that in case of CBW attack we might change our minds"

Hate to say it, but that is dead on. Whoever has the finger on the button makes the rules.

T

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> New restrictions for the use of nuclear weapons Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094