Absolute Capitalism

[Leoreth]

Surprise: They also have enough nukes to destroy the world. Still want to touch them?

 

[Dachs]

200ish warheads is enough to destroy the world?

Hell, the United States alone has tested five times that number

 

[Lord of Elves]

Nuclear War = ALWAYS a bad idea

 

[sophie]

Why are we talking about nuclear armageddon? What situation could be so bad as to demand killing both yourselves and everyone else?

IMO that's a terrible way to look at the world, killing billions of human beings just to get some kind of a "last laugh", like that bully that believes if I can't have it, then no one else can. And you call yourself a Christian, D3000.

 

[Lord of Elves]

Why are we talking about nuclear armageddon? What situation could be so bad as to demand killing both yourselves and everyone else?

IMO that's a terrible way to look at the world, killing billions of human beings just to get some kind of a "last laugh", like that bully that believes if I can't have it, then no one else can. And you call yourself a Christian, D3000.

People will always take the simple solution, even if it means destroying themselves.

 

[Leoreth]

If I were head of my state, I'd rather surrender it to communists, fascists or televangelists than let them and us be nuked to ground.

Nuclear weapons are a relic of the Cold War and have to disappear from this world. I'm very glad Germany never finished its plans for nuclear armaments.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I don't think anybody will touch us.

Except ourselves.

 

[stuge]

^We need a wipes cola off the screen-smiley stat!

 

[GhostWriter16]

If I were head of my state, I'd rather surrender it to communists, fascists or televangelists than let them and us be nuked to ground.

Nuclear weapons are a relic of the Cold War and have to disappear from this world. I'm very glad Germany never finished its plans for nuclear armaments.

Why are we talking about nuclear armageddon? What situation could be so bad as to demand killing both yourselves and everyone else?

IMO that's a terrible way to look at the world, killing billions of human beings just to get some kind of a "last laugh", like that bully that believes if I can't have it, then no one else can. And you call yourself a Christian, D3000.

My point, if anyone attacks us, they'd better think twice about it, because we have enough nukes to nuke the world into the ground.

Enough said. That's why we're safe from foreign opponents.

You'd better believe if I'm in office and somebody invades us, they will be nuked into the ground

 

[Harbringer]

My point, if anyone attacks us, they'd better think twice about it, because we have enough nukes to nuke the world into the ground.

Enough said. That's why we're safe from foreign opponents.

You'd better believe if I'm in office and somebody invades us, they will be nuked into the ground

Do you not even comprehend the implications of what your saying?

 

[Joecoolyo]

China is very quickly poised to take over America's role as the sole superpower. They have us by the balls in debt, roughly double our population, a massive military, and are effectively impervious to any effort of invasion by virtue of their sheer numbers.

But the thing with the Chinese economy is that it is dependent on America. If we decide to crap out and not pay back our loans from them (er however it works, I'm no economics major), then their economy will fall as well.

Oh, and they're military can't do crap if they don't have a blue water navy.

 

[GhostWriter16]

Do you not even comprehend the implications of what your saying?

If somebody invaded my country, I would do whatever I had to to protect us, yes, even killing lots of other people.

Now, if we could annhilate said nation without nukes I would, but if they were a threat to us, and they invaded OUR SOIL, yes, they would be nuked.

Of course, that has a lot to do with absolute capitalism http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=362941

 

[sophie]

Refer to post #309.

Do you have any idea what the implications of what you are saying are? I thought life was precious? I though it was sin to kill?

Nuclear arms are terrible weapons, and I would not wish them on any one. If I was the leader of a country, I'd surrender before I resorted to using Nuclear armaments.

 

[Lord of Elves]

If somebody invaded my country, I would do whatever I had to to protect us, yes, even killing lots of other people.

Now, if we could annhilate said nation without nukes I would, but if they were a threat to us, and they invaded OUR SOIL, yes, they would be nuked.

Of course, that has a lot to do with absolute capitalism http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=362941

I don't think you fully understand the implications of using our nuclear arsenal.

Every nuclear government in the world has an automatic defense system, that when they are nuked (or their allies/dependants/protectorates/international interests) they automatically nuke selected targets within seconds of the first blast. Launching one nuclear weapon, anywhere humans are living on the planet would end human existence within a matter of minutes.

 

[sophie]

And furthermore, you don't think they'd retaliate? Even if they weren't nuclearly armed, you don't think they'd use that as justification to torture or mass murder our civilians?

2 wrongs do not make a right, my friend.

 

[GhostWriter16]

And furthermore, you don't think they'd retaliate? Even if they weren't nuclearly armed, you don't think they'd use that as justification to torture or mass murder our civilians?

2 wrongs do not make a right, my friend.

That's not the issue. So, say someone nukes us. You don't nuke them back?

An imminent threat on our soil should and hopefully would be taken the same way.

Also, I am against disarmament, I think nobody would be idiotic enough to attack us with me as president, for this reason.

With you, its just a matter of a stronger army.

The threat would keep anyone from attacking us with me in the white house.

 

[Lord of Elves]

That's not the issue. So, say someone nukes us. You don't nuke them back?

An imminent threat on our soil should and hopefully would be taken the same way.

Also, I am against disarmament, I think nobody would be idiotic enough to attack us with me as president, for this reason.

With you, its just a matter of a stronger army.

The threat would keep anyone from attacking us with me in the white house.

No one was talking about not nuking an enemy that has nuked us. But what you seem to be implying is that you would not hesitate using nuclear force in non-nuclear warfare.

EDIT: Furthermore, your view of optimal foreign policy favors a series of threats, insults, and badgers towards countries that we believe may not accord with our desires.

 

[NBAfan]

Refer to post #309.

Do you have any idea what the implications of what you are saying are? I thought life was precious? I though it was sin to kill?

Nuclear arms are terrible weapons, and I would not wish them on any one. If I was the leader of a country, I'd surrender before I resorted to using Nuclear armaments.

I would only use nukes as an absolute last measure and only if our backs were against the wall if we have not been nuked.

 

[ZeletDude]

Nukes are a waste of money, a few are okay to prevent a nuclear war (MAD) but it'd be better if the us never opened the "Pandoras" box.

 

[GhostWriter16]

I would only use nukes as an absolute last measure and only if our backs were against the wall if we have not been nuked.

That's what I'm saying, if there was a genuine threat to us, militaristic, that was going to invade, I'd use the nuke as a bluff, if they invaded still, well,

Nukes are a waste of money, a few are okay to prevent a nuclear war (MAD) but it'd be better if the us never opened the "Pandoras" box.

Then we'd have lost millions of lives finishing Japan off. Better them then us, if we have to choose.