India and Nukes

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by RedMan12

Thats terrible, America only dropped bombs and killed countless innocent people because, the American Armed forces where spinless cowards and did not want to risk their own lives and invade Japan on land. Nuclear weapons are a cowards weapon. Whatever happend to facing your enemy face to face on the battlefield. Now its just some government lakey told to push a button.

Originally Posted by White Doors

Why shoudl the Americans have spent thousands of their soldiers lives in battle to invade japan?" Many more Japanese civs would have dies too if they had of invaded the home islands too not to mention.

Japan started it, America finished it. Because they dropped it, the world saw how destructive it was, and there has never been another one dropped thank goodness.

America would not have had to invade mainland Japan in any shape or form. The fire bombing of Tokyo ended the war. The Japanese and Americans were alreay discussing conditions for surrender. Hiroshima was over-kill. Nagasaki was unconsienable. America was making a point, and doing so for a reason. They wanted the world to know they were the boys with the big toy. Unfortunately they didn't realize that multiple countries would also have the same toys in less than a decade, many of them much bigger than the American bombs.

[White Doors]

" couple of things. For a missile defense shield to be effective the enemy has to use vehicles that leave the atmosphere. Neither North Korea nor Iran have this technology. A missile defense shield does not protect against a non-orbital target. As well, the missile defense shield has yet to produce a single successful test. The whole concept is a pipe dream, dreamed up by neo-cons who watched too many Star Wars movies.

Secondly, a nuclear threat is more likely from a smuggled in device, or from one launched off shore. The only ones with a serious military capability to do this are presently American allies. Iran does have a submarine fleet, but they are old and noisey like the Canadian subs. They would be easy pickings for the American Atlantic and Pacific defense nets. The greatest threat is the one where someone puts a nuke in an oil taker and floats it into New Orleans or Houston and then detonating it."

Wrong, Missle defence is proposed to protect from any type of missle that can carry a nuclear war head. I';m also quite sure that N. Korea's current missle technology is capable of reaching the stratosphere. And the last test was qualified as having some success. They did shoot one down. Is it a finish product? Not by a LONG shot, will it work? Sure if they invest enough it will eventually work.

I do agree your scenario is the more plausible situation, but why not try to protect from ballistic missles too?

[Kool Keef]

Originally Posted by RedMan12

Thats terrible, America only dropped bombs and killed countless innocent people because, the American Armed forces where spinless cowards and did not want to risk their own lives and invade Japan on land. Nuclear weapons are a cowards weapon. Whatever happend to facing your enemy face to face on the battlefield. Now its just some government lakey told to push a button.

Do you have any idea what happened on D-Day? God almighty. You might be the dumbest man alive.

[White Doors]

The firebombing of Tokyo killed more civilians than either Hiroshima or Nagasaki.

They did not enter into negotiations until after Horoshima as far as I can recall.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by White Doors

not to a dictarship rulked by a mad man or a country full of fanatics thinking that they will each have 72 virgins. fanaticism is the breakdown of MAD.

The problem there is that the dictator doesn't control the nuclear arsenal. There is not a button in a hidden room someplace where a stark raving lunatic can launch several bombs. The military commanders still have to give the order and those in the silos still have to turn the keys. Cooler heads would prevail. One guy may be a nut job, but not everyone in the country is a nut job.

BTW... Where do you come up with this stuff? The Weekly Standard?

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by White Doors

Wrong, Missle defence is proposed to protect from any type of missle that can carry a nuclear war head.

Wow, that would be some trick. Shooting an object out of the sky from space! The funny thing is, that thing called the atmosphere gets in the way and makes targeting impossible. That is why Star Wars is a fraud. That is why there has not been a successful test of the system and why there will never be a repeatable successful test.

I';m also quite sure that N. Korea's current missle technology is capable of reaching the stratosphere.

That's great, missiles would have to reach the thermosphere to reach their targets.

And the last test was qualified as having some success. They did shoot one down.

Wanna go blind on links that proves you wrong? The test was an utter failure as the interceptor did not launch.

Is it a finish product? Not by a LONG shot, will it work? Sure if they invest enough it will eventually work.

Yes, I'm sure trillions of dollars into a system, and enough tests will surely find one successful test. The system still will be completly useless (see the Patriot missile scams) .

I do agree your scenario is the more plausible situation, but why not try to protect from ballistic missles too?

There is protection from ballastic missiles. They're called treaties. They've worked for 50 years, why stop now.

[firebug]

Originally Posted by RedMan12

Thats terrible, America only dropped bombs and killed countless innocent people because, the American Armed forces where spinless cowards and did not want to risk their own lives and invade Japan on land. Nuclear weapons are a cowards weapon. Whatever happend to facing your enemy face to face on the battlefield. Now its just some government lakey told to push a button.

My grandfather just rolled over in his grave.

I am very tempted to risk a banning in order to share my true feelings.

I would however suggest some reading about operation overlord, omaha beach, as well as the Pacific Island-hopping campaign.

Also, the US is still handing out purple hearts that were manufactured in preparation for the invasion of mainland Japan.

~bug

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by White Doors

The firebombing of Tokyo killed more civilians than either Hiroshima or Nagasaki.

They did not enter into negotiations until after Horoshima as far as I can recall.

Negative. The fire bombing of Tokyo (killing 100,000) was on March 9-10.

Japan was ready to capitulate as early as the last few days of July, but the Japanese government was having problems with the language of the surrender. It took the Japanese Emporer's intervention and by-passing of the government to officially end the war. The wheels had long been in motion. Little Boy (killing 80,000) was an example to Japan. Fat Man (killing 40,000 immediately and an estimated 75,000 from radiation sickness) was a statement to the Soviets who had entered into the war two days after the first bomb was dropped.

[SeeGeeWhy]

Redman... that comment was uncalled for, big time. You should be ashamed of yourself.

[White Doors]

Originally Posted by Kool Keef

Do you have any idea what happened on D-Day? God almighty. You might be the dumbest man alive.

I'll second that.

[SeeGeeWhy]

White, fancy toys will never replace sincere diplomacy. Why would you bother pouring trillions of dollars into a system that might work... and if it did, would have a small chance of being put into use?

[White Doors]

"Wow, that would be some trick. Shooting an object out of the sky from space! The funny thing is, that thing called the atmosphere gets in the way and makes targeting impossible. That is why Star Wars is a fraud. That is why there has not been a successful test of the system and why there will never be a repeatable successful test."

uhhh.. BMD is initially going to be a land based system....
only. The space thing may come in later, may not. The Idea is to get it on the ascent or descent. look it up.

[SeeGeeWhy]

Another thing White... why aren't you answering my questions I posed about the US and Canadian economies? Based on the statements you've been making in this thread, it seems you are fairly guilty of making claims that you are not prepared to defend.

[White Doors]

Originally Posted by SeeGeeWhy

White, fancy toys will never replace sincere diplomacy. Why would you bother pouring trillions of dollars into a system that might work... and if it did, would have a small chance of being put into use?

Why did they bother with the Apollo mission? To get to the moon before the soviets. Everything else was secondary. Man, still hard to imagine they did that with 1960's technology eh? have you seen a TV from the 60's lately? haha wow.

[SeeGeeWhy]

Yeah, well the ballistic missle defense system, land based or space based, would be fairly simple to overload and penetrate. Send multiple rockets and only arm a small portion of them with live warheads... which do you shoot down? And I don't think you can say all of them...

[White Doors]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Come on now!

Do you really think that the USSR could have invaded North America without nuclear weapons? They couldn't even successfully invade and occupy Afghanistan in a conventional war.

I realize Canada is not a super-power, but give us some credit.

And not having a World War in 60 years isn't a big thing really. It's a blink of an eye, and the threat is still there, as much as it ever was.

The Soviets, after the end of WW2 up to the early 80's had a large numerical advantage in conventional warfare than did NATO. that's a fact. The quality of their equipment only started being surpassed at that time as well. Nato's nuclear deterrant was the only thing that kept the Soviets out of Western Europe and communist ideaology stated that all nations must be communist in order for it to work - so you'd have to be kind of niave to not think that the Sovets would have invaded if not for the nuclear deterrant, wouldn't you?

[White Doors]

Originally Posted by SeeGeeWhy

Another thing White... why aren't you answering my questions I posed about the US and Canadian economies? Based on the statements you've been making in this thread, it seems you are fairly guilty of making claims that you are not prepared to defend.

What questions?

[White Doors]

The military is the pointy end of diplomacy. negotiating without power or the illusion of power is futile.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by White Doors

Japan started it....

Well, that is debatable. It depends whether you think the war between America and Japan "started" at Pearl Harbor, or whether it started when America was helping Japan's enemies and choking off oil to Japan. You have got to know that if another country was doing that to the U.S., they would see that as an act of war before any actual battle took place.

Personally, I think you can trace it right back to the British Empire colonizing Asia, and the U.S. using brute power in the region to force Japan into trading and conceding power in the region. Pearl Harbor was the culmination of those things.

It's all a matter of opinion though. I just think it's more useful to trace things back to their roots. It's the only way to avoid it from happening again.

[I-Hate-Hulse]

Originally Posted by RedMan12

Thats terrible, America only dropped bombs and killed countless innocent people because, the American Armed forces where spinless cowards and did not want to risk their own lives and invade Japan on land. Nuclear weapons are a cowards weapon. Whatever happend to facing your enemy face to face on the battlefield. Now its just some government lakey told to push a button.

Just how old are you?