1. Foxi4

    Foxi4 Cynical Absurdist
    Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2009
    Messages:
    26,552
    Country:
    Poland
    *GASP!* They were storing enriched uranium for bombs? Who would've thought! What a shocker!

    Thankfuly only the U.S and Russia have the monopoly for nuclear arms storage - that makes the world a safer place.
     
  2. Jakob95

    Jakob95 I am the Avatar
    Suspended

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2009
    Messages:
    4,344
    Country:
    United States
    Well their is a difference with the U.S having nuclear weapons and Iran. U.S wouldn't just throw a nuclear bomb at a country because they hate them. But Iran would, without any hesitation.
     
  3. Minox

    Minox Thanks for the fish
    Former Staff

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2007
    Messages:
    6,754
    Country:
    Japan
    They wouldn't? As far as I'm aware USA is the only country on earth who has used nuclear weapons in combat.


    Granted, I don't think USA would do it again but what's to say Iran would use them?
     
  4. Foxi4

    Foxi4 Cynical Absurdist
    Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2009
    Messages:
    26,552
    Country:
    Poland
    Yeah, the U.S preferes thousands of soldiers, hundreds of tanks, carpet bombings using their latest aircrafts, tomahawk missles fired from advanced sea vessels, spec ops operations, pulling in their allies in to join the fun... *goes on and on*

    You funneh.

    You don't understand the concept behind having nuclear arsenal, why would I bother explaining? I wouldn't even know where to start.
     
  5. shakirmoledina

    Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2004
    Messages:
    6,613
    Country:
    Tanzania
    seriously? what in history has iran done in a violent way?
    putting down protests? what did the protesters do in fact?
    have they ever hit a place and caused civilian deaths as US has done so today?
    forget about everything and look at who is accusing who
    the nuclear bomb user who has killed insane amount of civilians in afganistan and iraq alone (not mentioning how many ladies were sexually abused and ppl hurt in prisons) and say nothing against worse crimes in bahrain... they say NOTHING about bahrain that is even close to being a threat (including ppl shot down, women kidnapped, men killed in their homes at night, school girls kidnapped and hit against the wall and also being threatened for [censored])

    besides if u do believe iran to be the muslim state they are showing themselves as, then believe it also that never will a muslim do such a thing... i dont even think its allowed to create a bomb that hurts more than it gives benefit. even if its benefit was more, the devastation is very significant

    Please, lets not believe US in these matters as they have always been showing double standards. ISRAEL hasnt signed the nuclear treaty that says that u cant have weapons while iran has and has clearly said that come check what we are doing. dont put up allegations by spying... go there and bring real time evidence that SHOWS what is being done
     
  6. m3rox

    m3rox GBAtemp Advanced Maniac
    Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2006
    Messages:
    1,673
    Country:
    United States
    Fake.

    Need a reputable source for this to be confirmed as real.
     
  7. Jakob95

    Jakob95 I am the Avatar
    Suspended

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2009
    Messages:
    4,344
    Country:
    United States
    Well the USA had to use it during World War II, probably a stupid move from them but it was the reason to end the war fast. Maybe because the U.S.A has a different type of government system then the extremists in Iran.
    EDIT: about the USA killing thousands of civilians in Afghanistan this isn't true. The U.S troops don't just go around killing random civilians for no reason, if they do then that means the civilian has been a threat and did something violent himself. Maybe its true that the U.S is killing Afghan Soldiers but remember this is a war. The Afghan soldiers are already ready for death as much as the US soldiers are. Their is a difference between killing a Soldier during war, and killing random civilians such as 911.
     
  8. Foxi4

    Foxi4 Cynical Absurdist
    Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2009
    Messages:
    26,552
    Country:
    Poland
    So you're basically saying that:
    1. Using nukes is perfectly fine when you need to use nukes.
    2. Carpet bombings do not cause civilian damage in the slightest, the shrapnels have extremist-seeking electronics in them and not one child lost its limbs during the fire fights.
    3. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were military bases, actually.
    4. Killing over 4000 civilians throughout the Gulf War and wounding hundreds of thousands is okay, but killing 3000 Americans during 9/11 is not.

    Get a grip of reality, you're delusional. Iranian, Iraqie and Afghan people have every right in the world to hate Americans with all their heart, even if just because of years of political pressure and all the parties the U.S has in the Middle East.
     
  9. Jakob95

    Jakob95 I am the Avatar
    Suspended

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2009
    Messages:
    4,344
    Country:
    United States
    If someone is about to kill you, and you have a gun would you shoot? Or wait until you get shot? Answer me this.
    But still my point was that Iran wants destruction.
     
  10. Foxi4

    Foxi4 Cynical Absurdist
    Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2009
    Messages:
    26,552
    Country:
    Poland
    ...are you slow? America started. In your analogy, it's Iran holding the gun now while the U.S government does everything it can to tease them into shooting. How can you not understand that?
     
  11. Sterling

    Sterling GBAtemp's Silver Hero
    Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Messages:
    4,023
    Country:
    United States
    Eh, I'm all for hating parties, but the majority of the US population are sheep. No need to hate the people who are just trying to make ends meet. Shouldn't hate the military either. Most truly believe that they're doing the right thing.

    Nukes should never have been put to use. Although, I'd say that they're much more humane than some Bio weapons or incendiary carpet bombings. Personally I'd have to say that conflict is a routine part of society. It will never change and as human beings we should all just try and make people in war zones comfortable. Most of which never had a choice in the matter.
     
  12. Foxi4

    Foxi4 Cynical Absurdist
    Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2009
    Messages:
    26,552
    Country:
    Poland
    I'm far from "hating" anyone and I agree with your point - conflict is within human nature and is not something that could be avoided.

    As far as nukes being humane is concerned, it's not the explosion that isn't - it's the background radiation, irradiated fallout and debris that are contaminating a huge area for years and years to come that aren't. The blast itself does not "kill alot of people in an inhumane manner". It's instantaneous. However, the after effects are inhumane.

    I don't like when people nod in agreement when someone says that the U.S is more "lawful" or "fair" than another country or that it is more entitled to have nuclear arsenal. I don't like when people say "Iranians are crazy, they shouldn't get such arsenal". It's hipocritical in perspective - if you deny someone the access to such weaponry, first dispose of your own stock completely. If you accuse another nation of being agressive, first stop being the most major agressor in recent history.
     
  13. Sterling

    Sterling GBAtemp's Silver Hero
    Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Messages:
    4,023
    Country:
    United States
    My apologies, I did not mean to put words in your mouth. At any rate, the only reason I said Nukes were far more humane is because of the explosion. However many biological weapons are meant to eradicate any society they are targeted by. You don't recover from eradication, at least with a fallout you can recoup and regroup. Life will continue on. Also with incendiary carpet bombing it affects civilians much more than a lone nuke because the fires wouldn't be extinguished by the 100 mph winds, but fueled.

    100% of human society are hypocritical at some point. Whether that be from any changing idealistic view, or someone who is ahead of their time in sociological affronts or teachings. Hypocrisy is guaranteed and inevitable. That being said, it irks me as well.
     
  14. Foxi4

    Foxi4 Cynical Absurdist
    Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2009
    Messages:
    26,552
    Country:
    Poland
    You're forgetting that a bio weapon "finishes its job" fairly quickly while radiation destroys lives of several generations. I wouldn't put my money on either, I'd be more inclined to "use" neutron bombs if pushed to it. Low radiation contamination, low explosion damage, low infrastructure damage, whatever lived in the area dies in the blast. It's the "Perfect Bomb" so to speak.
     
  15. Bladexdsl

    Bladexdsl ZOMG my posts...it's over 9000!!!
    Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2008
    Messages:
    19,135
    Country:
    Australia
    why not just use photon torpedo's their way more effective [​IMG]
     
  16. Foxi4

    Foxi4 Cynical Absurdist
    Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2009
    Messages:
    26,552
    Country:
    Poland
    "Photon Torpedos" actually caused hull damage in Star Trek. A neutron bomb, when it goes off, simply causes anything within a 2km radius to drop and die instantly while leaving most of the area fairly intact.
     
  17. Bladexdsl

    Bladexdsl ZOMG my posts...it's over 9000!!!
    Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2008
    Messages:
    19,135
    Country:
    Australia
    oh yeah that's right i meant quantum Torpedos [​IMG]
     
  18. Foxi4

    Foxi4 Cynical Absurdist
    Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2009
    Messages:
    26,552
    Country:
    Poland
    That's... that's even worse. That thing can blow up a Borg Cube in a single direct hit.
     
  19. Sterling

    Sterling GBAtemp's Silver Hero
    Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Messages:
    4,023
    Country:
    United States
    A DNA bomb when developed would be a more precise solution. Also, BIO weapons leave the victim aware. Nerve gases cause everything to shutdown until they suffocate. Painful, and you're fully aware. Diseases when spread also are painful while still being fully aware. There is a reason every BIO weapon is banned in usage by the UN. Not to say they aren't used, but yea.
     
  20. Foxi4

    Foxi4 Cynical Absurdist
    Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2009
    Messages:
    26,552
    Country:
    Poland
    Interesting concept, but it lacks the ever so satisfying "oumph!" of a standard "bomb", don't you think? Mushroom clouds are purdy.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted
Loading...

Hide similar threads Similar threads with keywords - secretly, enriched, stocked