If we drop the Nuclear Bomb again, the world as we know it is over with.

 

 

And no I am not against all that the government does.

 

 

I am just most vocal in the things I disagree with.

 

 

The Nuclear Bomb was actually created at the speed it was to combat Germany who we feared might have it.

 

After the Germans were proven that they didnt have the bomb, they needed a justification for the dropping of the bomb.

I don't see why dropping a Nuclear bomb is even an option.

We dropped the bombs on Japan to actually prevent greater casualties. We realized that no matter what, a lot of lives would be lost in ending the war completely. In the end, it appears that dropping the bombs did avoid many more casualties. It was a horrible thing to do, but it was a different time.

I'd say ignore them....but we've spread ourselves across the world, in this era of globalization.

 

I wish we had practiced isolationism and just stayed out of other country's business. I know yall probably think I'm a hypocrite because I support Bush....but really, we've spread ourselves out throughout the world that we do have to meddle in others' business. It's a damn shame, but it happens.

so you follow the George Washington school of isolationism.....

 

 

 

But yet you support King George......

 

 

 

 

that is a bit hypocritical....I hope there are numerous other issues of his that you do support. I tried explaining this, but did a lousy job, apparently.

 

If we hadn't already been involved across the globe, I would follow Washington's plan.

 

But b/c we ARE spread across this globe, we do have to get ourselves involved in others' business. And yes, I support Dubya

what if an attack will DEFINITELY need to nuclear countermeasures? We have to avoid this at all costs.

Whoever put nuking as an option is an idiot.

Whoever put nuking as an option is an idiot.

No doubt...

Whoever put nuking as an option is an idiot.

I didn't put it as a real option....I'm not an idiot.

Bush will not touch North Korea due to China and American interests in China.

 

This right now is China's problem.

how about non of the above? You all realize that if we attack them a la Iraq, China starts lobbing nukes at us, right? Are you all prepared for nuclear bombs in our backyard? 'Cause that is what will happen. How about letting the UN do their job like we did not do in Iraq, which is why we are in the sh@t hole that we are currently in, with no signs of being able to get out soon.

we need kissenger/nixonesque pressure on russina on china.

 

my solution? threaten to arm taiwan and japan with nukes. We will see who blinks first. China and russia would then definitely move of Il to get out to bring stability to the area for all of our sake.

we need kissenger/nixonesque pressure on russina on china.

 

my solution? threaten to arm taiwan and japan with nukes. We will see who blinks first. China and russia would then definitely move of Il to get out to bring stability to the area for all of our sake.

:huh

 

Who says we're not doing that already??? Knowing the history of this country to help arm the "wrong" countries, I wouldn't be surprised it that happens or is happening.

 

How about USA stops getting on other's businesses and concentrates on their land. How about that!

Well, I doubt we gave any one of those countries nukes. Pardon my ignorance, but I don't recall giving anyone nukes. Maybe india (in the form of nuclear energy, stupid us), but countries like France and Israel (israel can be its own topic) developed their own nuclear weaponry.

 

I know that the more countries with nukes, the worse off we are, but a threat is necessary in order to get china and russia to take North Korea's moves seriously. We cannot be paying off north korea every year (though if my memory recalls we didn't live up to our end of the bargain with north korea) so they don't produce weaponry. They have kicked out UN inspectors and openly flaunted that they are trying to build nuclear weaponry and that they have every right to use "preemptive strikes." Furthermore, they keep testing their missiles by firing them at over our allies and they are only trying to further their missile capability.

 

Iraq was no threat. north korea is. We spend in the tens upon tens of billions of dollars yearly to maintain an asian presence with our military. If we were to finally get north korea and their tyrant Il out of the way, it would actually eliminate a real threat to the US, and in the long run cost us LESS money. This is why north korea and Iraq are two entirily seperate issues. However, no war is necessary if we apply strong diplomatic pressure of russia and china (especially china) by threatening to make japan and taiwan nuclear powers.

 

How about USA stops getting on other's businesses and concentrates on their land. How about that!

I agree. and the only way to do this is to eliminate our over hundred billion dollar world wide presence in asia and europe. to get out of asia, we need the north korea problem solved, because as long as they are a threat to taiwan, south korea, and japan huge trading partners of ours), you're not going to see a decrease of military presence.

 

However, that's why we won't attack north korea, but we did attack Iraq. The military's real reason for keeping north korea a problem so long gives us leverage in asia as a strategic check on china. However, if we become noninterventionists, we don't need such a check.

Well, I doubt we gave any one of those countries nukes. Pardon my ignorance, but I don't recall giving anyone nukes. Maybe india (in the form of nuclear energy, stupid us), but countries like France and Israel (israel can be its own topic) developed their own nuclear weaponry.

 

I know that the more countries with nukes, the worse off we are, but a threat is necessary in order to get china and russia to take North Korea's moves seriously. We cannot be paying off north korea every year (though if my memory recalls we didn't live up to our end of the bargain with north korea) so they don't produce weaponry. They have kicked out UN inspectors and openly flaunted that they are trying to build nuclear weaponry and that they have every right to use "preemptive strikes." Furthermore, they keep testing their missiles by firing them at over our allies and they are only trying to further their missile capability.

 

Iraq was no threat. north korea is. We spend in the tens upon tens of billions of dollars yearly to maintain an asian presence with our military. If we were to finally get north korea and their tyrant Il out of the way, it would actually eliminate a real threat to the US, and in the long run cost us LESS money. This is why north korea and Iraq are two entirily seperate issues. However, no war is necessary if we apply strong diplomatic pressure of russia and china (especially china) by threatening to make japan and taiwan nuclear powers.

 

How about USA stops getting on other's businesses and concentrates on their land. How about that!

I agree. and the only way to do this is to eliminate our over hundred billion dollar world wide presence in asia and europe. to get out of asia, we need the north korea problem solved, because as long as they are a threat to taiwan, south korea, and japan huge trading partners of ours), you're not going to see a decrease of military presence.

 

However, that's why we won't attack north korea, but we did attack Iraq. The military's real reason for keeping north korea a problem so long gives us leverage in asia as a strategic check on china. However, if we become noninterventionists, we don't need such a check. There is no threat to the US but our own stupidity. By going around messing other countries we've created more enemies than ever. I don't see why are you so worried about those countries now, when you didn't give a s*** that the people in Iraq or N. Korea were suffering before 9/11.

 

Pardon my ignorance, but we know for a fact that we've brought onto us the hatred and the threats and this president is only making it worse.

 

I didn't imply that we gave "nukes" to anybody. I said "armed" and that includes many other things besides nukes.

There is no threat to the US but our own stupidity. By going around messing other countries we've created more enemies than ever. I don't see why are you so worried about those countries now, when you didn't give a s*** that the people in Iraq or N. Korea were suffering before 9/11.

Uh, I did. North Korea is a drain on our budget and has openly threaten attacks, attempt to build nuclear weaponry when not given bribes, and the icing on the cake is the death camps and voerall horrible condition of the north korean people. So yes, north korea if we don nothing continues to be an expense on us, yes it is threatening to us and is very open with its threats, and yes it is a humanitarian disaster. What reason is there for no doing something about the north korean question? Doing so forces one to chose a more deadly, expensive, and dangerous route. That's what I assert, and I am pro the cheapest, most humane, and best defensive decision for America and the world.

 

Pardon my ignorance, but we know for a fact that we've brought onto us the hatred and the threats and this president is only making it worse.

Yeah, but Bush isn't going to attack north korea. I wouldn't. I would apply extreme diplomatic pressure to china and russia to force north korea into not building nuclear weapons. how can you be against this?

 

I didn't imply that we gave "nukes" to anybody. I said "armed" and that includes many other things besides nukes.

You said, "who said we aren't doing that already" when I said, "give japan and taiwan nukes." i don't see how you were implying conventional weaponry.

Yeah, but Bush isn't going to attack north korea. I wouldn't. I would apply extreme diplomatic pressure to china and russia to force north korea into not building nuclear weapons. how can you be against this?

 

I am not against diplomacy. However, you mentioned before to "threaten" those countries with attempting to arm Japan with Nukes.... You seriously think that is a solution?

 

USA tries to help to damm much, to its own detriment. Don't you know that our "help" is widely unwelcomed? However, the damage is already done. Might as well fix the problem we created.

Fixing the problem takes action.

 

I am not against diplomacy. However, you mentioned before to "threaten" those countries with attempting to arm Japan with Nukes.... You seriously think that is a solution?

Yes, if it gets russia and china to take the situation seriously.