kaiser soze
01-21-2008, 08:51 PM
So, using nukes against people you don't want to have nukes leaves a positive impression?
Who truly suffers for this?
Why would someone condone the use of nukes (especially pre-emptively) when they tell others they cannot have nor can use them?!? Why do nations acquire nuclear weapons in the first place....to keep themselves from getting nuked.
This is a M.A.D. World
http://www.guardian.co.uk/nato/story/0,,2244782,00.html
The west must be ready to resort to a pre-emptive nuclear attack to try to halt the "imminent" spread of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction, according to a radical manifesto for a new Nato by five of the west's most senior military officers and strategists.
The five commanders argue that the west's values and way of life are under threat, but the west is struggling to summon the will to defend them. The key threats are:
· Political fanaticism and religious fundamentalism.
uh....anyone look in the White House as of late?
· The "dark side" of globalisation, meaning international terrorism, organised crime and the spread of weapons of mass destruction.
Who are the key sources for the funding of this shit?
· Climate change and energy security, entailing a contest for resources and potential "environmental" migration on a mass scale.
How many 1st world nations are helping speed up the destruction of the environment?
· The weakening of the nation state as well as of organisations such as the UN, Nato and the EU.
Who is selling off their countries business, security, and sovereignty?
Why are nukes becoming a popular option as of late to throw onto the table rather than finding REAL solutions to international problems?
Who truly suffers for this?
Why would someone condone the use of nukes (especially pre-emptively) when they tell others they cannot have nor can use them?!? Why do nations acquire nuclear weapons in the first place....to keep themselves from getting nuked.
This is a M.A.D. World
http://www.guardian.co.uk/nato/story/0,,2244782,00.html
The west must be ready to resort to a pre-emptive nuclear attack to try to halt the "imminent" spread of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction, according to a radical manifesto for a new Nato by five of the west's most senior military officers and strategists.
The five commanders argue that the west's values and way of life are under threat, but the west is struggling to summon the will to defend them. The key threats are:
· Political fanaticism and religious fundamentalism.
uh....anyone look in the White House as of late?
· The "dark side" of globalisation, meaning international terrorism, organised crime and the spread of weapons of mass destruction.
Who are the key sources for the funding of this shit?
· Climate change and energy security, entailing a contest for resources and potential "environmental" migration on a mass scale.
How many 1st world nations are helping speed up the destruction of the environment?
· The weakening of the nation state as well as of organisations such as the UN, Nato and the EU.
Who is selling off their countries business, security, and sovereignty?
Why are nukes becoming a popular option as of late to throw onto the table rather than finding REAL solutions to international problems?