11 Apr 14
Originally posted by FMFThe question was ... What should be done with countries that threaten to use them, nuclear weapons?
You mean countries like the USA?
As far as I know, the US is not threatening to use nuclear weapons on another country. There are countries, one in particular that does actually have nuclear weapons and has threatened to use them.
What should be done with a country like that?
11 Apr 14
Originally posted by FabianFnasI'd go further and say that ~ it's not just the fact that they have them ~ the threats are regular and explicit. I mean,the USA says it out loud, and what "it" means is crystal clear to those who are being threatened.
I agree with FMF.
Why have nuclear weapons at all if there isn't any threat behind them? To have them just for fun? What other use can you have than as a threat?
11 Apr 14
Originally posted by FMFThat's fine, I wouldn't go on a wild goose chase either. I just don't agree with you that the US threatens other countries with nuclear weapons. I have seen threats in the way of a retaliatory sense like if Iran were to attack Israel, the US would consider... or North Korea. Bot much more however.
It's in the news all the time. How come you don't know about it? What are you, an American?
11 Apr 14
Originally posted by yoctobyteWhat "wild goose chase"?
That's fine, I wouldn't go on a wild goose chase either. I just don't agree with you that the US threatens other countries with nuclear weapons. I have seen threats in the way of a retaliatory sense like if Iran were to attack Israel, the US would consider... or North Korea. Bot much more however.
11 Apr 14
Originally posted by yoctobyteI wonder - "Why does US have nuclear weapons?" And you answer something like "As retaliation if another country attacks another one with nukes." Am I right?
That's fine, I wouldn't go on a wild goose chase either. I just don't agree with you that the US threatens other countries with nuclear weapons. I have seen threats in the way of a retaliatory sense like if Iran were to attack Israel, the US would consider... or North Korea. Bot much more however.
If Israel uses their nukes against Iran (of some reason), (providing Iran hasn't nukes themselves, or haven't use them yet), then, would USA retaliate on behalf of Iran?
No, I wouldn't think so either.
11 Apr 14
Originally posted by yoctobyteI was just waiting to see if you have your tongue in your cheek. Seems you don't. Oh well. If you followed the international news, you'd know that whenever the USA is trying to bend some part of the world to its will and bumps up against relatively weak states ~ more often than not, non-nuclear states ~ it is invariably asked if it will rule out the use of nuclear weapons, and ~ every bit as invariably ~ it always declines to do so and says that all its military capabilities are 'in play' or 'on the table'.
Funny, if I didn't understand a little bit about you... I would probably bite.
However you parse the rhetoric or the double/triple bluff involved or any geopolitical lunacy 'in play', these are threats to use weapons and are an integral part of the strong-arming going on. Non-nuclear states are unable to makes this threat that the USA makes makes so often.
Non-nuclear states are also unable to do what the USA does frequently: fly or sail nuclear armed planes, ships or subs ~ or combinations thereof ~ wherever they want, whenever they want, into any trouble spot, regardless of whether the "opponent" has nuclear weapons.
11 Apr 14
Originally posted by FabianFnasFabian, having dialog with you is a little like work... a lot of work. You consistently misquote, draw a conclusion and then put words in other people's mouths. I don't know if it is a language barrier or something else, I know you have stated you were Swedish... perhaps that is it.
I wonder - "Why does US have nuclear weapons?" And you answer something like "As retaliation if another country attacks another one with nukes." Am I right?
If Israel uses their nukes against Iran (of some reason), (providing Iran hasn't nukes themselves, or haven't use them yet), then, would USA retaliate on behalf of Iran?
No, I wouldn't think so either.
What would be a huge help when quoting somebody is to copy and paste what is being said...
you can place quotes inside a quote box...that way there is no mistake and it is clear who is saying what, it makes it easier for others to read. You can find out how to do that in the forum's help section, just some friendly advice.
I wonder - "Why does US have nuclear weapons?" And you answer something like "As retaliation if another country attacks another one with nukes." Am I right?
I have proposed no answer to 'Why does US have nuclear weapons', in fact I did not see where that question was even asked.
I had been discussing with FMF about the US threatening others with nuclear weapons and did not feel that the US did that. I stated "I have seen threats in the way of a retaliatory sense like if Iran were to attack Israel, the US would consider... or North Korea", the discussion is about the threat to use nuclear weapons, not the 'reasons' why the US or any country has nuclear weapons... there is a difference.
So, no you are 'not right' about "Why does US have nuclear weapons?", you missed the point of the discussion.
Maybe it would be a good idea if someone were to start a thread on "Why the US has Nuclear Weapons", it would be a hot topic for sure, but not in the spirituality forum... probably science.