It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why Didn't America Take Over the World (1945-1950)

page: 14
11
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 30 2017 @ 12:01 PM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Well so far we haven't had a global nuclear war. I wonder about this "inevitable" label you've attached to this idea. There have been many wars fought since WWII, many of which involved nuclear powers, and no nuclear bombs have been dropped on any countries since the two in Japan.




posted on Jan, 30 2017 @ 12:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xenogears

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: Kryties
a reply to: JoshuaCox

You could have nuked yourselves and saved the rest of the world from the warmongering and greed that spanned the last 71 years and counting.



I can literally think of nothing worse than 2 world powers launching 10,000 nukes at each other.


Oh there is something worse, the doors opened by the powers of technological advancement. We're at a point where within decades the ability to create advanced manufacturing systems capable of replication and self-repair will be possible. Powered by advanced fully autonomous control software. If you realize that both biological immortality as well as computers directly interacting with the brain are also technological developments that will also likely happen this century...

You realize all of these developments combined allow for the possibility of both the absolute concentration of power, as well as the ability to have absolute control over the population. You can imagine humans unable to die by their own hand or by aging or disease, who're born connected to machines where every sensation, every thought, every single thing is monitored and controlled from birth.

All it would take is for a sadistic group or entity to have control of the system, and a living hell can be created on earth. A hell inescapable even by natural causes of death, where people are imprisoned without realizing it. A North Korea to the thousandth power, where those in power have godlike power over their subjects within virtual reality, and can use them as their play things.

Technology, knowledge, eventually allows man to become as god, opening both the doors of heaven and hell.



That still beats a nuclear Armageddon...

Under those conditions we are likely to conquer the galaxy...

A bunch of super smart immortal cyborgs with one common purpose?!?!

So nuclear extinction vs. conquering the galaxy?!?!

That's a very easy choice.



posted on Jan, 30 2017 @ 12:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

70 years and still waiting..be patient I guess



posted on Jan, 30 2017 @ 12:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Well so far we haven't had a global nuclear war. I wonder about this "inevitable" label you've attached to this idea. There have been many wars fought since WWII, many of which involved nuclear powers, and no nuclear bombs have been dropped on any countries since the two in Japan.


I mean long term inevitable, not even necessarily in our life times.

Your right , so far our leaders have bent over backwards to avoid it, but how long till we get another Hitler incharge of a nuclear state?? One generation? Maybe 2?

That's the thing we only get to crap out once.
edit on 30-1-2017 by JoshuaCox because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2017 @ 12:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

" I don't know how big the weapons will be when we fight WW3, but the one after that will be fought with sticks and stones...."



posted on Jan, 30 2017 @ 12:54 PM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox

No one knows what the future entails. What if we colonize space before we have a nuclear war?



posted on Jan, 30 2017 @ 01:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: JoshuaCox

No one knows what the future entails. What if we colonize space before we have a nuclear war?




We better hope so.. I'm just not sure we have evolved that much in less than a century



posted on Jan, 30 2017 @ 01:12 PM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Colonizing space has nothing to do with evolution.



posted on Jan, 30 2017 @ 02:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: makemap

originally posted by: Underfire2
Damn!!!! At the time, and with as much as they had invested in the weapons, they could have ended all civilization on the other half of the globe. They had already killed so many. What was the difference? I don't know know why they didn't. But if they had, it would have made for a hell of a different future.


If nukes were used it would have been a hell a lot worse because US didn't have proper tech to deal with nuclear radiation. Should have see US military being test subjects to nuclear radiation by nuclear bombs within a few distances. All of them die from radiation cancer sickness.The would've been the only option. Also Japan only surrender in 1945. US sending troops in to fight USSR or China. You don't even know what the Japs will actually do during that time. They could rebel and invade America this time.



You don't have to send troops necessarily. The only real requirement would be stopping anyone else from getting the bomb.

Nuke Moscow and Hong Kong in 1948, and do they ever get nukes?


Hong Kong??? That was a British possession at the time! How much geography and history do you actually know?



posted on Jan, 30 2017 @ 02:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: vonclod
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Germany was too far behind..they where working on it but did not have the infrastructure and money to make atomic weapons..it cost over 2 billion to develop the Manhattan project.



I thought we stole German scientists to make ours?? But reguardless it's an interesting question.

That's operation paperclip, and it was Einstein and Oppenheimer that were the true masterminds of the bomb.



Didn't einstine flee the nazis?? That means he started in their clutches. It isn't hard to imagaine the alternative reality that saw Germany win the war. Also saw Einstein stuck in Germany.

Einstein didn't flee, he was persecuted because his beliefs went against the reich's. He left on his own accord.


Einstein was visiting the USA when Hitler became Chancellor in January 1933. When he went back to Europe he realised that he could never return home. His house was occupied by the Nazis, his books burned and his theories scorned. He went first to Belgium and then to the UK, where he very nearly stayed, before finally gong to the USA.



posted on Jan, 30 2017 @ 05:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: makemap

originally posted by: Underfire2
Damn!!!! At the time, and with as much as they had invested in the weapons, they could have ended all civilization on the other half of the globe. They had already killed so many. What was the difference? I don't know know why they didn't. But if they had, it would have made for a hell of a different future.


If nukes were used it would have been a hell a lot worse because US didn't have proper tech to deal with nuclear radiation. Should have see US military being test subjects to nuclear radiation by nuclear bombs within a few distances. All of them die from radiation cancer sickness.The would've been the only option. Also Japan only surrender in 1945. US sending troops in to fight USSR or China. You don't even know what the Japs will actually do during that time. They could rebel and invade America this time.



You don't have to send troops necessarily. The only real requirement would be stopping anyone else from getting the bomb.

Nuke Moscow and Hong Kong in 1948, and do they ever get nukes?


Hong Kong??? That was a British possession at the time! How much geography and history do you actually know?



For the umpteenth time, you nuke the British first, to stop their silly accents from taking hold and bring about an American only dr who.... it's for the species.



posted on Jan, 30 2017 @ 05:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Colonizing space has nothing to do with evolution.






Well it's an we evolve as a society to where we Dione nuke each other before we have self sustaining off world colonies...

So another 250 years lol



posted on Jan, 30 2017 @ 05:48 PM
link   
Incorrect by the first sentence. The nazis had abombs in the early 40s and we even stole/finangled their uranium via uboot transfer to make our bombs (second).

a reply to: JoshuaCox



posted on Jan, 30 2017 @ 05:53 PM
link   
.

America doesn't need to rule the world. America needs to start taking care of its own, for once...



I hope trump heeds this



posted on Jan, 30 2017 @ 05:53 PM
link   
a reply to: chris_stibrany

Bullshavings..got any proof?



posted on Jan, 30 2017 @ 05:54 PM
link   
a reply to: chris_stibrany

I can agree with that



posted on Jan, 30 2017 @ 05:58 PM
link   
a reply to: chris_stibrany


Incorrect by the first sentence. The nazis had abombs in the early 40s and we even stole/finangled their uranium via uboot transfer to make our bombs (second).

Source? naw, cuz there is none.



I hope trump heeds this

Trump has no interest in nation building.
edit on 30-1-2017 by D8Tee because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2017 @ 05:59 PM
link   
The US didn't take over the world back then because they couldn't.
There is no way they could have done it, not then, not now.
Wars of occupation are very different than wars of liberation.



posted on Jan, 30 2017 @ 06:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: D8Tee
The US didn't take over the world back then because they couldn't.
There is no way they could have done it, not then, not now.
Wars of occupation are very different than wars of liberation.




You really don't have to occupy everywhere. Just be willing to nuke anywhere they try and create nuclear technology.

The best empires did't occupy unless there was a rebellion. Pay your taxes and you get to keep your king and gods. Just like the Persians.
edit on 30-1-2017 by JoshuaCox because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2017 @ 06:28 PM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox


You really don't have to occupy everywhere. Just be willing to nuke anywhere they try and create nuclear technology.


I'd argue you underestimate the human capacity for empathy, but I might lose lol. Not sure if the citizens of the regime would stand behind a policy like that. Nuke the soil and take the oil might work for a while, but it leaves a lot of humans perpetually pissed off.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join