Total Posts:39|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Nukes in the Middle East

Cogito-ergo-sum
Posts: 36
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 12:50:08 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Why is there such a media furore about the Middle East having Nuclear Weapons? I don't trust any one of the button pushers, so the more the merrier in my book.
brian_eggleston
Posts: 3,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 3:54:02 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 12:50:08 AM, Cogito-ergo-sum wrote:
Why is there such a media furore about the Middle East having Nuclear Weapons? I don't trust any one of the button pushers, so the more the merrier in my book.

I have some sympathy with this statement.

Israel has nuclear weapons and continually launches military attacks on her Arab neighbours, usually in contravention of international law and UN Security Council Resolutions.

Furthermore, Israel is not a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (which, incidentally, Iran is) so I think that Iran, Syria and others should certainly be allowed to develop nuclear deterrents to prevent Israel's illegal and expansionary military expeditions.
Visit the burglars' bulletin board: http://www.break-in-news.com...
Kinesis
Posts: 3,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 4:25:30 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 12:50:08 AM, Cogito-ergo-sum wrote:
Why is there such a media furore about the Middle East having Nuclear Weapons? I don't trust any one of the button pushers, so the more the merrier in my book.

Uh...because they might actually use them?

Plus uh, you don't trust people with nuclear weapons, therefore we should give more people nuclear weapons? What?
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 5:01:41 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 4:25:30 AM, Kinesis wrote:
At 7/7/2010 12:50:08 AM, Cogito-ergo-sum wrote:
Why is there such a media furore about the Middle East having Nuclear Weapons? I don't trust any one of the button pushers, so the more the merrier in my book.

Uh...because they are the most likely people on earth that would actually use them?

Plus uh, you don't trust people with nuclear weapons, therefore we should give more people nuclear weapons? What?
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 7:47:17 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 7:43:13 AM, badger wrote:
i want one.

If we had a list of the people on this site that should be the least likely ones to have the ability to push the button i think Nags would head the list, but you'd probably be in the top ten.
badger
Posts: 11,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 9:14:39 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 7:47:17 AM, innomen wrote:
At 7/7/2010 7:43:13 AM, badger wrote:
i want one.

If we had a list of the people on this site that should be the least likely ones to have the ability to push the button i think Nags would head the list, but you'd probably be in the top ten.

i would love a good war.
signature
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 9:34:29 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Here's an idea. If the Middle East can't have nukes then the West should get rid of all theirs too to avoid hypocrisy. The US is the only country to ever use nukes in combat afterall...
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 9:39:15 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 9:34:29 AM, InsertNameHere wrote:
Here's an idea. If the Middle East can't have nukes then the West should get rid of all theirs too to avoid hypocrisy. The US is the only country to ever use nukes in combat afterall...

Meh. That would be fair, but I would rather the US keep its nukes than Iran get them. While they did use the weapons in 1945, they only used it for that one theatre, despite all the advances in technology and the situations that cropped up where nuclear weapons use could have occurred, they never used them. Iran I don't trust on that front.
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 10:28:00 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 7:47:17 AM, innomen wrote:
At 7/7/2010 7:43:13 AM, badger wrote:
i want one.

If we had a list of the people on this site that should be the least likely ones to have the ability to push the button i think Nags would head the list, but you'd probably be in the top ten.

Hey hey hey. I'm anti-war.
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 10:37:51 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 10:28:00 AM, Nags wrote:
At 7/7/2010 7:47:17 AM, innomen wrote:
At 7/7/2010 7:43:13 AM, badger wrote:
i want one.

If we had a list of the people on this site that should be the least likely ones to have the ability to push the button i think Nags would head the list, but you'd probably be in the top ten.

Hey hey hey. I'm anti-war.

Everyone's anti-war...well except badger.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 10:43:55 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 10:42:22 AM, Rob1Billion wrote:
How long can humans exist while nuclear weapons also exist?

We've been doing good for 70-odd years so far. We haven't even set off another weapon on a population in that time.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 2:10:25 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 9:34:29 AM, InsertNameHere wrote:
Here's an idea. If the Middle East can't have nukes then the West should get rid of all theirs too to avoid hypocrisy. The US is the only country to ever use nukes in combat afterall...

U.S. is a democracy. The Middle East is mostly a dictatorship which has regular wars and political tensions. Yeah sure, let's just throw nukes at them so they can make us desert too!
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 2:11:52 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 10:43:55 AM, Volkov wrote:
At 7/7/2010 10:42:22 AM, Rob1Billion wrote:
How long can humans exist while nuclear weapons also exist?

We've been doing good for 70-odd years so far. We haven't even set off another weapon on a population in that time.

Not directly.

"By then, children and others living in downwind areas were beginning to develop leukemia. As time passed, people in affected areas suffered extraordinarily high rates of cancer and thyroid ills. " - http://www.commondreams.org...
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
Kinesis
Posts: 3,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 2:43:54 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 10:42:22 AM, Rob1Billion wrote:
How long can humans exist while nuclear weapons also exist?

A nuclear weapon can wipe out a small city. Unless some nutcase randomly gets control of a large nuclear arsenal, they're unlikely to end humanity.
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 3:29:20 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 2:11:52 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 7/7/2010 10:43:55 AM, Volkov wrote:
At 7/7/2010 10:42:22 AM, Rob1Billion wrote:
How long can humans exist while nuclear weapons also exist?

We've been doing good for 70-odd years so far. We haven't even set off another weapon on a population in that time.

Not directly.

"By then, children and others living in downwind areas were beginning to develop leukemia. As time passed, people in affected areas suffered extraordinarily high rates of cancer and thyroid ills. " - http://www.commondreams.org...

Wow, stunning evidence of the looming non-existence of humans. Well done Panda.
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 3:31:44 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 2:10:25 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 7/7/2010 9:34:29 AM, InsertNameHere wrote:
Here's an idea. If the Middle East can't have nukes then the West should get rid of all theirs too to avoid hypocrisy. The US is the only country to ever use nukes in combat afterall...

U.S. is a democracy. The Middle East is mostly a dictatorship which has regular wars and political tensions. Yeah sure, let's just throw nukes at them so they can make us desert too!

Nobody should have nukes. That was the point I was getting at.
Rob1Billion
Posts: 1,338
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 4:34:16 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 10:43:55 AM, Volkov wrote:
At 7/7/2010 10:42:22 AM, Rob1Billion wrote:
How long can humans exist while nuclear weapons also exist?

We've been doing good for 70-odd years so far. We haven't even set off another weapon on a population in that time.

Another?

Humanity has been around for anywhere from 10,000 to 1,000,000 years, depending on how you measure it. 70 years is less than one human lifetime. My point? Unless our morality progresses faster than our technology, we're all doomed.
Master P is the end result of capitalism.
Rob1Billion
Posts: 1,338
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 4:43:47 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 2:43:54 PM, Kinesis wrote:
At 7/7/2010 10:42:22 AM, Rob1Billion wrote:
How long can humans exist while nuclear weapons also exist?

A nuclear weapon can wipe out a small city. Unless some nutcase randomly gets control of a large nuclear arsenal, they're unlikely to end humanity.

On a long enough timeline, everything that can possibly happen will happen. At some point, someone will take control that shouldn't. Maybe it will be Jeb Bush.
Master P is the end result of capitalism.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 6:03:28 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 4:34:16 PM, Rob1Billion wrote:
Another?

Humanity has been around for anywhere from 10,000 to 1,000,000 years, depending on how you measure it. 70 years is less than one human lifetime. My point? Unless our morality progresses faster than our technology, we're all doomed.

Given the fact that in those 70 years, there has been more danger and tension in the world than in ever before in preceding history, I'm quite confident in our ability to keep things under lid.
Rob1Billion
Posts: 1,338
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 6:37:23 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 6:03:28 PM, Volkov wrote:
At 7/7/2010 4:34:16 PM, Rob1Billion wrote:
Another?

Humanity has been around for anywhere from 10,000 to 1,000,000 years, depending on how you measure it. 70 years is less than one human lifetime. My point? Unless our morality progresses faster than our technology, we're all doomed.

Given the fact that in those 70 years, there has been more danger and tension in the world than in ever before in preceding history, I'm quite confident in our ability to keep things under lid.

More tension than the crusades? Than the fall of the Roman Empire? If the Romans had fallen while in possession of nuclear warheads they probably would have used them. If more countries in the Middle East had nukes they probably would use them. At any rate, even if we hold out another century, there still will be endless centuries to come in which we would have the opportunity. And it will be a religious person who gives that order, I would wager.
Master P is the end result of capitalism.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 6:51:28 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 6:37:23 PM, Rob1Billion wrote:
More tension than the crusades?

Yes.

Than the fall of the Roman Empire?

Yes.

If the Romans had fallen while in possession of nuclear warheads they probably would have used them. If more countries in the Middle East had nukes they probably would use them. At any rate, even if we hold out another century, there still will be endless centuries to come in which we would have the opportunity. And it will be a religious person who gives that order, I would wager.

So, the entire premise of you idea is that, well, there is the possibility and, like, time.

Rob, that is a very, very bad argument.
Rob1Billion
Posts: 1,338
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2010 10:55:22 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 6:51:28 PM, Volkov wrote:
At 7/7/2010 6:37:23 PM, Rob1Billion wrote:
More tension than the crusades?

Yes.

Than the fall of the Roman Empire?

Yes.

If the Romans had fallen while in possession of nuclear warheads they probably would have used them. If more countries in the Middle East had nukes they probably would use them. At any rate, even if we hold out another century, there still will be endless centuries to come in which we would have the opportunity. And it will be a religious person who gives that order, I would wager.

So, the entire premise of you idea is that, well, there is the possibility and, like, time.

Rob, that is a very, very bad argument.

Yes and no. I'm not going to argue the history with you because I don't know a damn thing about history, but I do know that hundreds and thousands of years aren't going to peacefully sail by while we sit on a huge arsenal of nuclear warheads controlled by religious people who are waiting for the Antichrist to arrive. On a long enough time line, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero. Your evidence (70 yrs) suggests that we may very well make it out of this century, but then what? What happens in the centuries of
2200
2300
2400
2500
2600
2700
2800
2900
3000
3100
3200...

I'd like to think we are going to last much more than a few thousand years from this point, but each year is a roll of the nuclear dice. I don't think nuclear disasters are that likely, but "unlikely" turns into "certainly" on a long enough time line.

The current trend seems to be that more countries are creating these devices.
Master P is the end result of capitalism.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/8/2010 8:54:23 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
I have an idea: If there is high probability that a solar storm takes place around 2013, which will annul tech devices etc., then everything should be backed-up, except nuclear systems. This way, we can ensure that all nuclear power countries would have to reset (start over again on) their nuclear reactors, much like the position Iran is in today. But, laws could be made to make this illegal, and then we would have a world without many usable nuclear weapons.

I know that not all nuclear bombs would be ruined, but many advanced ones would.
Strikeeagle84015
Posts: 867
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/8/2010 9:48:16 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
The solutions for nukes is give every country on the planet 100 super powerful warheads then nobody will launch them because if say Iran tries to nuke Israel, Israel can nuke back
: At 8/17/2010 7:17:56 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
: Hey dawg, i herd you like evangelical trolls so we put a bible thumper in yo bible thumper so you can troll while you troll!

Arguing with an atheist about God is very similar to arguing with a blind man about what the Sistine Chapel looks like
Marilyn Poe

Strikeeagle wrote
The only way I will stop believing in God is if he appeared before me and told me that he did not exist.
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/8/2010 10:05:33 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/8/2010 9:48:16 AM, Strikeeagle84015 wrote:
The solutions for nukes is give every country on the planet 100 super powerful warheads then nobody will launch them because if say Iran tries to nuke Israel, Israel can nuke back

That'll be about right in 30 years or so.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/9/2010 8:03:38 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/7/2010 3:31:44 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 7/7/2010 2:10:25 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 7/7/2010 9:34:29 AM, InsertNameHere wrote:
Here's an idea. If the Middle East can't have nukes then the West should get rid of all theirs too to avoid hypocrisy. The US is the only country to ever use nukes in combat afterall...

U.S. is a democracy. The Middle East is mostly a dictatorship which has regular wars and political tensions. Yeah sure, let's just throw nukes at them so they can make us desert too!

Nobody should have nukes. That was the point I was getting at.

Way too late for that.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.