Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 40

Thread: The Nuclear Paradox

  1. #1
    Patron
    Join Date
    15 Apr 08
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    236

    The Nuclear Paradox

    - 5 nations "legally" possess them
    - 2 officially posses them
    - 1 is known to have possession
    - and a couple more are trying to get them

    - how does America and other nations convince the govts around the world to give up their ambitions for nuclear weapons when the big 5 are legally allowed to posses them while other have to give them up?

    - how do we make this world "safer"
    when some of us dont want to give up what we are persuading others to give up?

    the NNPT is a topic of interest
    Last edited by 1947; 12 Jun 08, at 12:22.

  2. #2
    Banned Senior Contributor dalem's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Nov 04
    Location
    Columbia Heights, MN
    Posts
    13,048
    It all starts with punctuation...

    -dale

  3. #3
    Field mechanik Senior Contributor omon's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Nov 06
    Location
    bk
    Posts
    3,628
    he did use a dot, once.
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!" B. Franklin

  4. #4
    Military Enthusiast Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    15 Aug 03
    Posts
    5,349
    Quote Originally Posted by omon View Post
    he did use a dot, once.
    But that means more dots have to follow. When will it end? When people wants other people to use dots but don't use dots, is it fair? Some people don't use dots, yet all the rest of people use dots however there are few people who are trying not to use dots.

    How do we make this world "better"
    when some of us want to give up what we are persuading others not to give up?

  5. #5
    Officer of Engineers
    Guest
    Hitesh,

    He meant that we could not be bother to decipher the original post.

  6. #6
    Military Enthusiast Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    15 Aug 03
    Posts
    5,349
    Quote Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    Hitesh,

    He meant that we could not be bother to decipher the original post.
    I know. But I was making a humorous attempt to skewer several posts.

  7. #7
    Officer of Engineers
    Guest
    Hitesh, YOU'VE TO GOT WORK ON YOUR TIMING.

  8. #8
    Patron
    Join Date
    15 Apr 08
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    236
    there happy now?

  9. #9
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    15 Sep 06
    Posts
    6,755
    Quote Originally Posted by 1947 View Post
    - 5 nations "legally" posses them
    - 2 officially posses them
    - 1 is known to have possession
    - and a couple more are trying to get them

    - how does America and other nations convince the govts around the world to give up their ambitions for nuclear weapons when the big 5 are legally allowed to posses them while other have to give them up?

    - how do we make this world "safer"
    when some of us dont want to give up what we are persuading others to give up?

    the NNPT is a topic of interest
    It's the modern paradox. Some of those who have them wish they didn't, and some of those who haven't got them lust mightily for them.
    Semper in excretum. Solum profunda variat.

  10. #10
    Defense Professional Dreadnought's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 May 05
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA.
    Posts
    14,728
    The big difference is that those that have them wont launch them nor attack another nation with them because they are of wrong religious origins or because some idiot Imam or Ayatolla said so. They will only use them to defend their respective nations. Countries that call blatantly for the destruction of another country for religious reasons cannont be trusted with such responsibility nor such destructive power EVER because they act like children in a grown up world.
    Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

  11. #11
    Regular
    Join Date
    22 Apr 08
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    90
    Quote Originally Posted by glyn View Post
    It's the modern paradox. Some of those who have them wish they didn't, and some of those who haven't got them lust mightily for them.
    You must be talking about marriage. How is that a modern paradox?

    Sorry, can't resist

  12. #12
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    29 Mar 08
    Posts
    999
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnought View Post
    The big difference is that those that have them wont launch them nor attack another nation with them because they are of wrong religious origins or because some idiot Imam or Ayatolla said so. They will only use them to defend their respective nations. Countries that call blatantly for the destruction of another country for religious reasons cannont be trusted with such responsibility nor such destructive power EVER because they act like children in a grown up world.


    Stalin had the bomb, Mao during the cultural revolution had the bomb, Pakistan has the bomb, Kim jong il too,etc...Why did they think twice when there were diplomatic crises ? Mutual assured destruction. Do you think Ahmaninedjad is more crazy and unsensitive than the guys above?

  13. #13
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    15 Sep 06
    Posts
    6,755
    Quote Originally Posted by Oscar View Post
    [/B]

    Stalin had the bomb, Mao during the cultural revolution had the bomb, Pakistan has the bomb, Kim jong il too,etc...Why did they think twice when there were diplomatic crises ? Mutual assured destruction. Do you think Ahmaninedjad is more crazy and unsensitive than the guys above?
    He could be, for all we know. What if he thinks he's carrying out Allahs will?
    Semper in excretum. Solum profunda variat.

  14. #14
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    29 Mar 08
    Posts
    999
    Quote Originally Posted by glyn View Post
    He could be, for all we know. What if he thinks he's carrying out Allahs will?
    The red button pushed by one person is a myth. These are national security affairs, it involves lots of people, especially in Iran, the president of Iran couldn't do it all by himself. And when it's about the survival of the state even Ahmaninedjad will put aside his beliefs. An israeli official said war with Iran was inevitable.. who believes him? The same for Iran, you need consensus. To Find two people who agree to die in the same time it's already difficult, now try to convince the whole Iranian establishment...because let's face it: they know that would be the consequence.

  15. #15
    Banned Senior Contributor dalem's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Nov 04
    Location
    Columbia Heights, MN
    Posts
    13,048
    Quote Originally Posted by 1947 View Post
    there happy now?
    Honestly?

    It's a little better but it's still not written English.

    -dale

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Candidates, How would you grapple with Iran's nuclear drive?
    By FibrillatorD in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 16 Aug 07,, 16:11
  2. How clean is India?
    By Neo in forum Central and South Asia
    Replies: 163
    Last Post: 04 May 06,, 00:09
  3. Iran to be refered to U.N. Security Council
    By Dreadnought in forum International Politics
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 16 Jan 06,, 20:14
  4. An Article worthy of Lull.....
    By MIKEMUN in forum The Middle East and North Africa
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 19 Mar 05,, 01:04
  5. A Preemptive Attack on Iran's Nuclear Facilities: Possible Consequences
    By lulldapull in forum The Middle East and North Africa
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 20 Nov 04,, 21:27

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •