Israel gets fourth submarine capable of launching nuclear warheads, page 2


Pages: <<  1    2  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 7 times


reply posted on 3-5-2012 @ 08:03 PM by buster2010
Originally posted by CountDrac
reply to
post by illusive man



Considering not too long ago (50 years) the Germans wiped out half of the Jewish population on the planet. I would say at least another 50 years.

However being a normal person with a brain I don’t really think you can put a cash amount on such an atrocity. But hey that’s just me.
edit on 3-5-2012 by CountDrac because: (no reason given)
edit on 3/5/12 by masqua because: Removed Off Topic comment



No it wasn't the Germans that did those things to the Jews it was the Zionist and Nazi's. And seeing how much money Israel milks from the rest of the world it looks like they are trying to get paid for it.

If America really was interested in peace then we would stop a rouge nuke state from acquiring this weapon.


reply posted on 6-5-2012 @ 06:26 AM by SpeachM1litant
reply to post by RATSOYFY37



So essentially you think the weapons should be used simply because Israel has these weapons and it would be a waste not to use them? That seems like backwards thinking. Using weapons should be the last resort, not the thing you press and kill thousands of people simply because it is getting old and it is better to use it than throw it away. A submarine capable of being armed with nuclear warheads isn't your fridge.

This place makes me question the IQ of Americans at times.


reply posted on 7-5-2012 @ 02:05 AM by RATSOYFY37
Originally posted by SpeachM1litant
reply to
post by RATSOYFY37



So essentially you think the weapons should be used simply because Israel has these weapons and it would be a waste not to use them? That seems like backwards thinking. Using weapons should be the last resort, not the thing you press and kill thousands of people simply because it is getting old and it is better to use it than throw it away. A submarine capable of being armed with nuclear warheads isn't your fridge.


My point is that if you do purchase weapons of mass destruction (or any other product), and the raison d'etre of the transaction remains (Iran's threat to Israeli security, in this case), then not exploiting said weapons and mitigating your response deems the whole bargain wasteful, and indeed it shouldn't have been conducted in the first place. If Israel is to engage in Cold War with Iran, it shouldn't wait for an inter-Iranian revolution which might never occur, but capitalize its resources for the sake of Iran's evaporation; since Israel has achieved the measures, the only logical conclusion is that they should be used.


reply posted on 18-5-2012 @ 02:53 PM by RATSOYFY37
Originally posted by coolieno99
Originally posted by RATSOYFY37


My point is that if you do purchase weapons of mass destruction (or any other product), and the raison d'etre of the transaction remains (Iran's threat to Israeli security, in this case), then not exploiting said weapons and mitigating your response deems the whole bargain wasteful, and indeed it shouldn't have been conducted in the first place. If Israel is to engage in Cold War with Iran, it shouldn't wait for an inter-Iranian revolution which might never occur, but capitalize its resources for the sake of Iran's evaporation; since Israel has achieved the measures, the only logical conclusion is that they should be used.

During the 1980's, Russia had 40,000 nuclear weapons. Does this means that the Russians should have use them, instead of letting them sit there and rust?


There's no correlation here. I was referring to a state of affairs in which one has purchased massive weaponry for a certain purpose, just to have it rot underground. In Russia's case, it's strategic armament with no actual intention to use it (it was acquired during a nuclear race between the two super-powers -- the Cold War --, not for any specific purpose of implementation), the weaponry being used as a counter-force against the US. Also, in the case of Russia, the weaponry not only would not have acheived anything of meaning if had been employed and inducted for a war, but the American reciprocation would have left Russia devastated.

So again, you're comparing whole different scenarios.
edit on 18-5-2012 by RATSOYFY37 because: Grammar Nazism

Pages: <<  1    2  >>    ^^TOP^^



Israel Uses a 13 Year Old Boy as a Human Shield
  Posted 15 days ago with 38 member flags
The Most Outrageous Hateful Rhetoric of All Time
  Posted 16 days ago with 37 member flags
US Preparing for a Post-Israel Middle East?
  Posted 12 days ago with 26 member flags
Iran Bashing, Terrorism and Who Chose The Chosen People, Anyway?
  Posted 16 days ago with 21 member flags