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.

 

And The US is aloud to have nukes....why?

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 01:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by e 2 e k 1 a 7
Why would you compare NYC to Montreal? haha, montreal ... Toronto is better then montreal, hell even Ottawa is better then Montreal.

[edit on 7-3-2005 by e 2 e k 1 a 7]


But none of those Canadian cities is better than even Omaha, NE. - that's the real point.
Canadian = someone who thinks "How 'bout them Maple Leafs, eh?" is an intelligent and insightful question.




posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 01:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Voice_of Doom
There is no enemy anywhere - Lao Tse

Lao Tse needed to get out more .....
Someone on the other side should introduce
him to the black shadow of Hitler.



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 01:24 PM
link   
hahaha...how in the hell....does..

"Why should the US be the only country aloud to have nukes"
become...
"The US is the only country with nukes"

I said the first statement because that seems to be the attitude I get from your country. With them trying / wanting to dis-arm every other country but their own.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Consider the ratio's though. Canada's population compared to the US is small, but a large chunk of that population is in south eastern Ontario. So in ratio compared to the rest of the countires population, it is big.

[edit on 7-3-2005 by e 2 e k 1 a 7]



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 01:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by e 2 e k 1 a 7
Canada has no nukes because along time ago we signed a contract with the US saying that we will never try to make Nucleur weapons. We weren't scared

You do understand that Soviet nukes had canadian cities as their targets right? And that it was US detterence that prevented those nukes from being lauched yes?


So Iran constantly threatens the security of the US, the only thing I've seen or read that remotely threatened the western world was their leader saying that if the US tried to invade Iran there would be hell to pay.

Then you have not been paying enough attention. I'll agree that iran isn't likely to send an army into the US. They did however have their agent Chalabi feed the US false information to goad them into going to war with iraq, irans traditional enemy. Iran also supports international terrorism, and is likely to at a minimum sell nuke materials on the terrorist black market. Besides which, it publically maintains that it is openly hostile to the US.



He didn't say he was going to nuke the US,

Obviously no one is going to say that.


So I am going on that, you better got find that FOX news article you read or watched and quote it.

I hardly need to watch fox news in order to be aware of current politics or past history.

So how exactly are we protected by you?

Since the Soviets are gone its hardly relevant. The main protection was from the soviets. Canada is too isolated and too unimportant to be the target of anyone else.


wecomeinpeace
Yep, the hypocrisy is stupendously obvious

There's no hypocrisy. The US is part of the Non proliferation treaty. Are you suggesting that the US withdraw from it?



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 01:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
Canada is too isolated and too unimportant to be
the target of anyone else.


Hey Nygdan. I agree with ya' up to here ... Canada
is full of INFIDELS. The Muslim extremists want ALL
infidels dead, no matter who they are and no matter
what appeasement they subscribe to.



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 01:30 PM
link   
I hope you are kidding, about the insightfulness of the Canadians. Because me and my peers have long debates and conversations about deep topics.

You are refering to canadian hicks, about the same as American Red-necks, so I guess It would be fair to generalize america's population with the backforest red-necks to the south.



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 01:31 PM
link   
heres the answer your looking for


the US has nukes for a deterant to other countries developing them and using them because if they use one they know that the US will turn there country into a glowing wasteland. that is deterance.



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 01:33 PM
link   
Who is to say that the other countries dont want nukes just as a deterence? Just to say leave me alone.

Everyone thinks that just because a country wants a nuke to feel secure, that they automatically want to launch it at someone.



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by e 2 e k 1 a 7
I hope you are kidding, about the insightfulness of the Canadians. Because me and my peers have long debates and conversations about deep topics. You are refering to canadian hicks,


You see the problem for you (guessing you think you're one of the "deep" Canadians) is, when you post the kinds of things you have in this thread, it's really hard for any one else to tell the difference.



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 01:37 PM
link   
All I am doing is playing the devil's advocate. But seriously, why does everyone think that a country that is trying to become a nuclear power, is only going for it because they want to destroy someone else? Maybe they want it to preserve their way of life, as a deterent not to invade them.



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 01:42 PM
link   
Yo, Zeke . . .


In the world I see - you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Tower. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying strips of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighway.


I hate to break this to you, but the Rockerfeller Center is no where near the Sears Tower.




posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan

You do understand that Soviet nukes had canadian cities as their targets right? And that it was US detterence that prevented those nukes from being lauched yes?



No, most don't seem to understand that. Canadian cities are still targeted. The nations in the British Commonwealth all have big red X's on them. Still (and that wouldn't be so if we we're the only nation with the things).



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 01:49 PM
link   
Howard...

Uhm... what's your point? haha, I dont see it. The signature is talking globaly not in closed vicinity, so range and locations don't really matter.

Key Phrase: "In the world"

[edit on 7-3-2005 by e 2 e k 1 a 7]



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 01:50 PM
link   
The reason canucks dont have nukes is because the USA has protected them and their liberal ideaology for decades. You have never had a sizable army to protect yourself. You sit back and watch the world revolve around you and dont take a stand for all the canadian "CITIZENS" "ASIANS" "ARABS"crossing the border into our country illegally via boats at the detroit lake st clair border, lake erie border. You wont take a stand against anything that offfends people. Pot is a accepted cigarette for children. I cant tell you how many teens I know that believe your government condones the use of a know DRUG that causes brain disease. I could go on and on, canada has road the shirttails of the US for decades is the bottom line..... If we didnt exist, I'm sure you would be speaking russian or chinese....



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 01:57 PM
link   
Marijuana is an accepted cigarette for children? Hahaha, it isn't even acceptable for anyone to smoke it freely yet. And how would children be able to get their hands on it? Damn...I must be going to the wrong people.

We don't have a sizable enough army, I agree. But again we have like 1/9th of the population of the united states.

Canada - 32,248,600 (roughly)

United States - 285,669,915 (roughly)

So by simple reasoning, our country is obviously going to have a much much smaller army.

www.sustreport.org... - Canada
www.govspot.com... - US

[edit on 7-3-2005 by e 2 e k 1 a 7]



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 02:02 PM
link   
The U.S. wants nukes because of all the countries in the world, the U.S. wants to destroy itself the most.


At least that's a philosophical way of looking at it.



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by e 2 e k 1 a 7
Who is to say that the other countries dont want nukes just as a deterence? Just to say leave me alone. p

Indeed, who is to say? Can you somehow guarentee that thats what they want it for? No, no one can. So the world, not the US, agreed to limit nukes globally.


why does everyone think that a country that is trying to become a nuclear power, is only going for it because they want to destroy someone else?

No one does think this. The issue with iran is that they are breaking the rules, they are hostile, they are keeping inspectors out, and they are, quite simply, lying about some of their activities. No one is saying 'iran can't have nuclear power'. And even iran has agreed to 'not have nuclear weapons'. The IAEA, the US, and other countries, are trying to hold them to that agreement, especially when they are lying and being uncoperative. It does not inspire faith.
Besides, the only reason iran has nuke power tech, is because of things like the US and the IAEA, which was created to distribute nuke tech to everyone, in exhange for making sure it was used for peaceful purposes.

Maybe they want it to preserve their way of life, as a deterent not to invade them.

That does not follow. The US has had ample opp to invade iran. It has not. Since the US has not done so, and is now saying that its concerns are that iran is going to have nukes, why would any thinking iranian say 'well if they want to invade because o fnukes, maybe we should get nukes'? If the iranians don't want war, then they have to not make nukes.

Hahaha, it isn't even acceptable for anyone to smoke it freely yet.

Hate to break it to you but pot has been legalized and is openly smoked in parts of canada.



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 02:19 PM
link   
Weed, hasn't been legalized anywhere as of yet. It is only for some, and they have to have serious illness' to even have a chance at it. And Children smoking it (legally), I really want a link or example of that.

I smoke it freely, aslong as the authorities are not around.


Give me a few examples of where it has been completely legalized. From the last I have heard it was legal to carry a very limited amount. Well, not legal, but you would only get a fine, not a criminal sentence.



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 02:29 PM
link   
Nukes are more likely to prevent major wars than start them, as long as they aren't in the hands of religious crazies or crazies in general. The more countries that have them the greater the risk but a few major powers having them actually prevents more conflict than it starts. If Russia, America, China and the UK/France didn't have nukes than the cold war would not have been so cold. There is simply too much to loose from these major powers fighting a war to destroy each other, both in terms of economics and human life on both sides for any but the craziest leader to start one. Nukes in the hands of the more powerful countries might be the very thing that has been preventing ww3, why change the status quo by letting everyone and his dog get them? If anything we could stand to see a few less countries with them but i don't think the US should be one of these because of their superpower status.

[edit on 7-3-2005 by Trent]



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 02:34 PM
link   
I dont know but maybe its because the US since we invented the bomb we have only used 2 in battle.......shown that we have restant and we can use conventional way to subdue our foes



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join