Which country is FIRST to attack with nuclear weapons

Originally posted by BenReclused
reply to post by WarJohn

 

Would you kindly explain what a "neclear weapon" is?

See ya,
Milt

edit on 29-11-2011 by BenReclused because: (no reason given)

Neclear weapon it's an unclear weapon,not clear nor clean, unclear..using neclear it's ;ike the rubber Chinese bomb,it jumps until k..ll everyone!

Truthfully,

Israel. They will get themselves into a predicament only a massive warhead can get them out of.

It'll be the Belgians, quietly biding their time to strike when no-one expects it. Seriously though probably Pakistan after they accidentally lose one or maybe North Korea after Kim Jong il gets really drunk one night and gets his playstation and nuclear launch machine mixed up.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
Obama hasn't got the stones....period.

Seriously? You think it takes 'stones' to launch a nuclear device?? Holy crap man. Talk about an ignornt statement. God help any nation/group that detonates a nuclear device. Ultimately, when people see the resulting carnage, disease and suffering that nation/group will forever be an international pariah. There will be no place to hide, the act will prove indefensible and that entity will see itself as a a permanent outcast.

You better hope Obama doesn't 'have the stones'.

reply to post by Bearack

I agree with this, the more I look at Pakistan these days the more uncomfortable I feel about them having nukes. Hopefully the U.S, UK and nato have a game plan for going in there very fast and basically taking their weapons off of them and out of the country if it's deemed necessary.

Probably Israel, they listen to no one.

reply to post by jtma508


The USA is a permanent outcast? Last time I check we glassed two Japanese cities killing untold amounts of people. People are still haunted by those incidents.

I think Canada should do it.

that would show everyone we can be crazy too, every other country gets to be

reply to post by BIGPoJo


That's true. We were in the midst of a World War at the time and the technology had never been seen. 'Next' time it will be a rash act and indeffensible. Back in WWII there wasn't the capacity for news to be disseminated widely and in near real time as now. This is a different --- albeit no less morally wrong --- situation.

No one has said Iran??? ok they might not have one now ,( I think they do but this is just me, no real proof) but in the long run they will and will want to use it, just to teach the west a lesson do not mess with Iran, it will be the death for them if they do, or would it, they Iran could argue the US used one to end a war, they Iran used it to prevent one.

I think Ireland should throw some nukes threats out...they're too quite now days!

No in all seriousness...I don't care who fires nukes first...but I am a bit concerned with where they are going to land!

reply to post by BIGPoJo
Do you think the men who put their names on the bomb were haunted by it after the event? I'm sure they had no idea what kind of hellish power was about to be unleashed on so many unsuspecting people

reply to post by jerryznv
it will be the mid east, Pakistan Vs India, Iran Vs Turkey Israel, Syria Vs Israel I do not think Israel would be the one to launch first. the second area of concern is China and North Korea, they both want land they can not have, Russia US UK all a big bluff, one launches we all launch

1. Biggest threat today is Pakistan and India. Kashmir could easily escalate into a nuclear showdown.

2. Israel if they ever feel an existential threat and Jerusalem or Tel Aviv might look as if they are going to fall

3. North Korea if they feel threatened enough

4. Russia may begin to use tactical nukes as a show of resolve. It would be a good idea strategically. The US will know they are serious when they make threats like they have against aggression against Syria. A nuclear power who isnt afraid to use it would be a threat you must take seriously.

reply to post by Atzil321


I am sure the people who armed and dropped the second bomb were the most haunted. It was not supposed to be dropped in that valley of Nagasaki which killed over 50k people. It was supposed to be dropped on military installations. In fact, Nagasaki was a back up target, their real target was obscured by cloud cover so they moved on to Nagasaki and was dropped off target by accident.

Originally posted by BIGPoJo
reply to post by Atzil321

 

I am sure the people who armed and dropped the second bomb were the most haunted. It was not supposed to be dropped in that valley of Nagasaki which killed over 50k people. It was supposed to be dropped on military installations. In fact, Nagasaki was a back up target, their real target was obscured by cloud cover so they moved on to Nagasaki and was dropped off target by accident.

I saw on some history channel if they had hit their original target they would have vaporised a load of allied P.O.W's so they probably take comfort in that. The main moral justification was it would save up to a million allied troops from an invasion of the home island of Honhu. Openhiemer regretted it though, especially after he went on the Mcarthy black list. what amazes me about the whole ww2 thing was Stalin had the bomb plans as quick as they were making them.

Hmmm maybe these guys

The country with the most to "gain" and least to "loose" by using a nuke is Israel. Likely used as a goad to get the US top do their dirty work on Iran. If they get caught they will be wiped off the map. If it is an all out warfare setting the first use probably will be either the US as a pre-emptive strike or China as a defensive measure in retaliation to a serious conventional attack.

Japan! Considering the country doesn't have the bomb, the Japanese are doing a damn fine job of spreading radiation around the world as a result of that nuclear power plant explosion! It's payback for what the U.S.A. did to them!

Originally posted by flexy123

Originally posted by ZeussusZ
the usa.
They have done it before and are really into this pre-emptive strike thing.

Like Hiroshima/Nagasaki was pre-emptive? Cheezus get your facts right..

Actually as it relates to nuclear weapons, those were both preemptive strikes.

Germany was close to developing their own nuclear arsenal at that time so the US said "let's nuke them first".