#1
|
|||
|
|||
Initial Wogga Poll Results, Day 1....
.....8 for 8 think nuking is no good. Well I'm sure others will chime in and balance the scales Aside to HDPM: I might just surprise you! |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Initial Wogga Poll Results, Day 1....
That would be good. I will leave the possibility open. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Initial Wogga Poll Results, Day 1....
But thanks for letting us know the threat of allowing idiots have control of nuclear weapons. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Your Cheerfulness is so.....
.....underwhelming. Maybe 1 day you can think without jerking your knee. Hopefully, this will all become clear to you after a few days of allowing people to chime in on their thoughts |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
the Palestinians would nuke the Jews
You just need to phrase it in a way the anti-Semites can accept, Dr.Wogga. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Thanks TOF, I\'ll Count You as \"Yes\" *NM*
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
nope, just showwing the difference
There is no such thing as limited nuclear war, Dr.Wogga. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Disagree. Nagosaki & Hiroshima were what?
...unlimited nuclear war?? Do you agree that our war with Japan probably doean't end if we didn't nuke them? Further, the first radical Arab state that gets nuclear capability is going to use it on Israel ASAP. That seems a given to me - obviously others don't feel the same. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Disagree. Nagosaki & Hiroshima were what?
I think it is damn likely that certain Arab states would nuke Israel if they could. In Iranian newspapers a topic which is fairly often discussed lightly amongst military pundits, is whether it would take one or two nuclear weapons to destroy Israel. I agree with Kasparov. Militant Islam must be defeated before their offensive capabilities grow much greater, and we must take the offensive to them in order to do it. I don't believe that means nuking them, but I do think it means armies of occupation while we oust the bad leaders and clean out the terrorists and terrorist supporters. I also agree with Kasparov that it means nation-building in the aftermath. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Disagree. Nagosaki & Hiroshima were what?
Dropping the bombs was one choice we had back then. The other choice was to invade Japan and take heavy casualties. Either one would have ended it. The result was horrific, but I'm not second guessing the use of them. War is hell. We gave them a chance to surrender. |
|
|