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.

 

Proof that the USA needs to be disarmed.

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 08:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by AceOfBase



editorandpublisher

..........asked Americans whether they would be willing or not willing “to have the U.S. government do each of the following” and then listed an array of options..............

...............Finally, the option of using “nuclear weapons to attack terrorist facilities” drew the support of 27% of adults, with 72% opposing,.....


[edit on 3-3-2005 by AceOfBase]


Firstly it did not ask if americans Wanted to use nukes. It asked if they would be Willing to use nukes.

The question is rather calculated because it's qualified with "...to attack terrorist facilities"

And furthermore, even though modern nuclear weapons Can be many times more powerful than the first ones we made, that doesn't mean that they all Are. The United States has developed many small nuclear weapons with much reduced environmental damage. The fact is that we have some specialized nuclear weapons that produce a lower yeild than many of our conventional explosives. Presumably many of these "willing" people are thinking of these types of weapons. Presumably many of the others are a little insane or uneducated. In the right circumstance, and using the appropriate nuclear device, I MIGHT be "willing" to use them......but it's a big maybe.

That said, I would certianly hope that no one anywhere or anytime feels the need to use a nuclear explosive on people,.,..especialy innocent people. It's something I could never Want to happen.

"Willing to use" and thinking they "Should be used" are 2 different thinngs.

[edit on 3-3-2005 by spike]

[edit on 3-3-2005 by spike]




posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 11:44 AM
link   
I couldnt agree with you more AceOfBase what gives the U.S the right to have nuclear weapons and Iraq or Iran not, someone said the reason Iran should be stopped from getting nukes is because theyve threatened to nuke the U.S, if thats the case well then Iran shouldnt have any nuclear weapons but neither should the U.S, they think theyre responsible enough to hold nukes but after seeing what went down in Iraq i think america should give up its nukes for the worlds sake.



posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 03:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by fishbrain
I couldnt agree with you more AceOfBase what gives the U.S the right to have nuclear weapons and Iraq or Iran not.


You'll probably learn this in school one day, but the US has had nukes from the begining. Long before any laws and bans were in effect.

Why can't the US have the Great Wall of China? What give China the right to have the Great Wall of China?


AceofSpace:
Read what spike said. You completely took it out of context.
Plus
"That support has declined 7% since 2001, however."
Even after 9/11 there has been a decline....

try again.



posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77

Originally posted by AceOfBase
Who cares if the cost of Windows and Office gos up 1000% when you have ready alternatives like Linux and Openoffice?




See how fast that well dries up if the United States pulls the plug on any development and the Internet. Linux could be a bit tough, but OpenOffice is owned by Sun Microsystems, a U.S. corporation.

Edit:

Anyway, it's no good without any Intel or PowerPC chips!

[edit on 3/3/2005 by djohnsto77]


Actually OpenOffice is owned by the community now, the Copyleft holder is Sun Microsystems(is it under Copyleft or the GPL?)



posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 03:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
[You'll probably learn this in school one day, but the US has had nukes from the begining. Long before any laws and bans were in effect.

No different to chemical and biological weapons, but America doesn't (well isn't supposed to) have those any more. How are nukes any different?

Also don't forget that you wouldn't have a delivery system if wasn't for those crazy Germans you stole.



posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 04:18 PM
link   
This guy is insane. He thinks that the country that has done more good and freed more people than any country in the history of the world should be DISARMED???

Tell that to the survivors of the Holocaust. Tell that to the citizens of Kuwait. Tell that to the Muslims in Kosovo. Tell that to the South Koreans. Shall I go on?

Just because one survey says that 27% of adults in America think we should use Nuclear weapons against Muslim Extremists does NOT mean that 27% of our armed forces or military commanders think that as well. Obiously they don't or you would be hearing serious discussion about it, and it would most likely have already been carried out.

I'm sure if you did a survey of North Koreans, the large majority would feel that nuclear weapons should be used against the United States. So for your first mission of your quest towards a nuclear-free world, you should go talk to Kim Jong Il and tell him you are collecting his nuclear weapons effective immediately!



posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 04:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by DrHoracid
I agree the US should disarm, we should launch everthing we have right now at the rest of the planet................




The Republicans are ready to address corporate outsourcing.


No seriously dude, this pattern of yours is scary.

I don't know if I should offer you help or just let the professionals help you.



posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 11:06 PM
link   

You'll probably learn this in school one day, but the US has had nukes from the begining. Long before any laws and bans were in effect.

Your point being?


Why can't the US have the Great Wall of China? What give China the right to have the Great Wall of China?

Yea your right China shouldnt be allowed to have that wall because it poses such a threat to the world, what gives the Chinese the right to have a big wall in their country.


This guy is insane. He thinks that the country that has done more good and freed more people than any country in the history of the world should be DISARMED???

The country that has done more good and freed more people in the world, yea you just keep telling yourself that whatever makes you sleep better at night.


Tell that to the survivors of the Holocaust.

Oh yea i suppose the Americans were the only ones that did anything in WW2, the Americans came in at the last minute, they didnt do any more than any country that fought against the nazis in WW2 and besides what the hell has that got to do with having nuclear weapons?


I'm sure if you did a survey of North Koreans, the large majority would feel that nuclear weapons should be used against the United States.

Honestly your one of the most single minded asswipes ive ever seen, so what are you trying to say that the majority of North Koreans are so stupid they think its a good idea to drop a nuke which would mess up a good part of the planet? If north korea wanted to nuke U.S they woulda or woulda tried to do it already.


So for your first mission of your quest towards a nuclear-free world, you should go talk to Kim Jong Il and tell him you are collecting his nuclear weapons effective immediately!

And why should they be disarmed before U.S?



posted on Mar, 6 2005 @ 01:13 PM
link   
I don't think that we (the US) should be disarmed, but I do disagree with Bush's double standard. How can you tell someone else not to develop nukes when your country has nukes? Then again, they complained about the election in Ukraine while disregarding our "fair" election.


And DrHoracid, you need SERIOUS help. For real. No, my bad, you need HE'P!!



posted on Mar, 6 2005 @ 01:40 PM
link   


Seriously the United States seems to be the only strong remaining voice of sanity and moral clarity left in Western civilization. Others exist, but they are drowned out by the reactionary voices of France and Germany.


Not really. You seem to forget this is a country which after the two world wars, did not give African Americans equal rights; this is a country before those two wars, that invaded a foriegn land and killed millions of it's inhabitants, or coverted by force, them to their creed. And only decades later brought over millions of African slaves to work in cotton farms.

France and Germany, reactionary? I'm sorry, but reactionary is usualy a term used to describe those affiliated with the far right, not socialist leaning countries like France and Germany..

Deep



posted on Mar, 6 2005 @ 04:58 PM
link   
Already, ZeroDeep!

The "patriots" seem to live in this fairy tale version of America, where she is just and provides freedom for all. Yeah, right!


On a side note, I love how "freedom" has been such a common topic nowadays. Freedom, freedom, freedom. I guess that's why there's a New Freedom Initiative. Don't worry, forced psych tests are freedom...



posted on Mar, 6 2005 @ 06:40 PM
link   
Funny isn't it. The US seems to be doing this whole "they have nukes therefore we need to attack" them thing, and meanwhile, while yes the US IS reducing it's overall nuclear arsenal, it is developing more and more weaponry that uses DU, which technically does NOT fall under the category of "nuclear weapons", therefore they are not restricted on what they can do, even though many soldiers (especially field engineers) and their families are now suffering from deformities and illnesses caused by radiation...apparently radiation levels in the iraqii desert are WAY above normal...

Stories of soldiers climbing all over tanks hit by DU shells, getting covered in radioactive dust & being told by their superiors that it's perfectly safe, then months down the track having kids born with no eyes, extra arms, malformed skulls etc etc...yet the US still deserves to have nuclear weapons because it's more responsible & civilised? Because it won't use them against what it percieves as an enemy?



posted on Mar, 6 2005 @ 09:42 PM
link   
A lot of retoric here about what country should do what, we could probably dismantle half of our nukes, it's not likely they could all be used due to the fact that we would suffer the consequences of fallout. We only need a enough to be a threat to another aggressor any more is overkill. Instead of nukes what you really should be worried about is the fact that Japan, China, S.Korea, Saudi Arabia and many others own our debt, if they call the loan, what would happen. Gw Bush has aggravated this debt with his irresponsible minions and the congress just sat by and played the game. Should we disarm, IMO, NO, but we don't need to blow any more money on that stupid SDI program. Good manors at the world table would be a better defense shield that trying the knock nukes from the sky because we ticked off another country.
DU = Disposing of Uranium.



posted on Mar, 6 2005 @ 10:01 PM
link   
Um, we already DO live under a nuclear shadow.

Both Russia and China have had ICBMs capable of wiping us out for many years.

Moving nukes to Cuba wont make much more a difference.



posted on Mar, 6 2005 @ 10:55 PM
link   
If it can't be done militarily then tariffs should be placed against any nation that owns nuclear weapons or refuses to sign the NPT.

The United States is one of the only nations on earth that could shut its self off from the rest of the world. We have fresh water and resources. We have farms and those old factories can be reopened. We have labor and we have the will to do things you and the rest of your lot wont. perhaps you should take your thumb off the end it is backing up into your brain.



posted on Mar, 6 2005 @ 11:09 PM
link   
And who is going to do this?

The U.N.? hahaha, I'm pretty sure ol' GWB doesn't care what they have to say.

-wD



posted on Mar, 6 2005 @ 11:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77
Yeah you and what army? Ha ha ha



Mother Natures Army...a lttle shake here...a little water there...add a touch of yellowstone...a sprinkle of twister...and clean it down with a cane or ten...it's only a matter of time. Then all the happy clappers will see it as a sign that God has left the building.



posted on Mar, 6 2005 @ 11:40 PM
link   
It is a scary thought that 27% of americans see that a nuclear device should be even "considerd" to be used in a attack on any country at ALL.
I really dont think that the normal joe blow american understands the effects of such a nuclear device. They are ready to kill millions of INNOCENT iranians because they want to develop nuclear technology to be able to supply the electrical demands of their country. As stated befor the nukes these days aint the same used on hiroshima and nagosaki, they are 100 times more deadly. The scarier thing is that the american public is getting more inclined to the propaganda they are being feed, and i wouldnt be surprised on the next 4 years that 27% hits around 40%.
But in the ironic side of the topic, if america does let a nuclear device off in a then russia, china, and probably the u.k. will retaliate agaisnt the u.s. So you want to kill million of innocent people, then expect millions of your own to die.



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 12:15 AM
link   
Wang says,


The scarier thing is that the american public is getting more inclined to the propaganda they are being feed, and i wouldnt be surprised on the next 4 years that 27% hits around 40%.
Mabey Americans are just getting fed up with being the worlds punching bag....mabey this has little to do with OUR governments "propaganda" and more to do with actually listening to the rise in anti-American ideas being floated more and more.
Mabey 2-bit nations that threaten the USA need to have their bubble popped so they understand that making threats against us in NOT going to be as productive as other options.

Wang hypothosis here,


if america does let a nuclear device off in a then russia, china, and probably the u.k. will retaliate agaisnt the u.s.
This is almost funny....lets say the USA does use a nuke in iran for some stated reason.....do you REALLY think that China or Russia value Iran enough to launch a nuke strike against the USA, KNOWING that we WOULD vaporize them too? Its a cost/gain scenario, and frankly other that the political/enviro concerns, i doubght that any reasonable nation would attack the USA for it...they might take many other forms of sanctions, embargo, removal of diplomats etc, but dont think throwing their country into the toilet would be worth the selective use of nuclear weapons against specific targets would entail.



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 12:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by truthseeka
Already, ZeroDeep!

The "patriots" seem to live in this fairy tale version of America, where she is just and provides freedom for all. Yeah, right!


On a side note, I love how "freedom" has been such a common topic nowadays. Freedom, freedom, freedom. I guess that's why there's a New Freedom Initiative. Don't worry, forced psych tests are freedom...


You aint kiddin...Have you ever wondered why, if this such is a free country, they have to keep reminding us? Or is it more like rote learning...
en.wikipedia.org...

It's funny how Americans are so obsessed with being the big #1.
You'll get so uptight and upset over anything that can be even remotely considered "amerikan bashing".
Like a spoiled kid who does wrong but feels slighted when punished.
Like the bully that can laugh at others misforetunes but get mighty upset when the tables are turned.
Get over yourselfs. You've all been so brainwashed to be super competitive, that as long as you're wining and #1 then you think you are doing the right thing. Like rich people who think their wealth is God given and they have been blessed and chosen. Yes, there are a lot of rich americans who think that. Talk about #in crazy twisted way of thinking.
So no it doesn't surprise me that 27% suport the use of nukes. People here live in a vacuum like the rest of the world doesn't matter.
It's nationalism in it's ugliest form. Hitler would have been very proud.
The majority are so desensitized from TV and movies (I've never known a country so obsessed with movies and TV) that they don't think of the increadible death and destruction and aftermath of war. It's just another movie. It's only happening whilst watching the screen. Change the channel and watch Springer. If it wasn't for the war we'd all be speaking Arabic.
It's easy and comforting to believe the party line. It's easy to convince ourselfs of our freedom. Especialy when we are told these things 24/7.
Rote learning, tell someone often enough they'll end up believing it.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join