"The Nuclear Demon"

i never say they were peacekeeping weapons.

Originally posted by deltaboy
i never say they were peacekeeping weapons.

No but thats thier purpose...you cant just "redefine" a weapon....

Hey devil the U.S. still uses Napalm and other incendiary agents. In the 80’s the UN proposed a bill to ban the use of all incendiary agents and bombs, but the U.S. refused to sign it.

WP,

The US refused to sign? Well colour me surprised!!!

Delta/Devil,

Do you think that if the US was to destroy all their nuclear weapons tomorrow, that the likelihood of another state launching a nuclear attack on it would change? If so, why?

Cheers

BHR

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Hey devil the U.S. still uses Napalm and other incendiary agents. In the 80’s the UN proposed a bill to ban the use of all incendiary agents and bombs, but the U.S. refused to sign it.

I wasnt too sure about them using napalm legitly since I heard they used it in falluja which seemed a bit "inhumane"

Do you think that if the US was to destroy all their nuclear weapons tomorrow, that the likelihood of another state launching a nuclear attack on it would change? If so, why?

If the US did stop using nukes then the chance of another state would increase BUT the US has enough conventional warheads to destroy the leaders of those countries....several times over....

[edit on 26/02/2005 by devilwasp]

DW,

"If the US did stop using nukes then the chance of another state would increase BUT the US has enough conventional warheads to destroy the leaders of those countries....several times over.... "

That is my point exactly. The balance of technology has changed so dramatically that what used to take 1000 bombers or one nuke can now be done by 1 B2 mission.

Cheers

BHR