Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Question for people that live in the USA

page: 3
41
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 10:33 PM
link   
reply to post by solomons path
 


These nations are not called middle East as far as I know. Certainly they do not threaten Israel or the Arab states or they would not feel alarmed. Iran has been backing Israel's enemies for decades. If they have nukes the Israelite would destroy them for sure.




posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 10:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by skyzeagle
reply to post by superman2012
 


You don't sound American. You sound like you're from Greenland.


Canadian actually.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 10:34 PM
link   
reply to post by superman2012
 


Superman was born in America.

You'll deny the truth just to maintain thread superiority like a dog chasing a stick.

Have at it. You earned it.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 10:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by ADVISOR
reply to post by superman2012
 


I have always been a form supporter of pre-emptive strike.

Of course my stance on nuclear arms is that we do not need them. Energy on the other hand, is what Iran says it wants, its the waste the international community is most concerned about.

So, where does that leave us?



Well, what if the US government wants to do a preemptive strike against the US citizens to protect them. Take away all their guns? Wouldn't that be the same thing? (Not literally, just in spirit the same thing.)

Also, with China pursuing Thorium as a fuel, we wouldn't even have to worry about issues like Iran.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 10:37 PM
link   
reply to post by skyzeagle
 


And for the record, the cartoon artist was living in Cleveland when the super hero was born. Not Canada.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 10:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by skyzeagle
reply to post by superman2012
 


Superman was born in America.

You'll deny the truth just to maintain thread superiority like a dog chasing a stick.

Have at it. You earned it.


Ok, try to obfuscate the issue as much as you can, I can tell you don't want to actually discuss this as you are fixated on Superman's lineage.

PS- Born on Krypton, which isn't part of the USA yet.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 10:40 PM
link   
reply to post by superman2012
 


To simplify the answer I will put it this way. Keeping weapons technology out of the hands of those who are considered the enemy or potential enemy has been practiced by every civilization throughout history. It is a common tactic. We are not talking about a boxing match with rules where you want the opponents to be evenly matched. It comes down to wars where one side try’s to remain superior it does not make a lick of sense to try to make both sides evenly matched. The world is not a utopia and never will be. Iran is not an ally of the US so there is no reason why we should want or allow them to develop city or Earth killing weapons. Nuclear weapons are not conventional nor are they defensive weapons.

. Iran is not what I consider a stable government either so the possibility remains that if they did develop such weapons that rogue factions within their government could gain control even the possibility of terrorist factions taking control. Pakistan has that problem now there have been several instances where terrorist groups have tried to gain control of those weapons. The world is dangerous enough as it is there is no need to let it become worse. Iran with nukes is akin to letting children play with grenades everyone would likely get hurt.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 10:43 PM
link   
I'll add I read that if Israel believes they are going to die in a nuclear war, their policy is not to destroy just the enemy who attacked them. Their policy is to destroy all their enemies. There would be a lot of radiation going around the globe. The other possibility is Iran attempting to sneak nukes near the US coastline. With a strong nuke, close enough might work to cause massive destruction if they are really into suicide. There are a lot of suicidal people in the Middle East. I'm not sure why someone would be happy at the area having nukes when they want to use them. I would assume that Iran would want to build up a big enough arsenal to counter Israel's missile defense so that a first strike would still wipe Israel off the map as the leader of Iran has stated his desires. Israel's nuclear subs would strike back making the whole Middle East and anyone they deemed an enemy very radioactive.

I don't know. I'm not an expert. I was just wondering if that would mean several nukes would go from Israel to Russia and then from Russia to lots of other places and things could escalate. I feel better already. I wouldn't need to worry about working or retiring many years from now. One of my last thoughts if I died slowly could be that some people thought it would be good if Iran had nukes. Iran having nukes affects the whole globe or very likely will one day. If my neighbor has a gun, the rest of the world will not be affected. I see gun rights and nukes in Iran as two very different things.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 10:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Grimpachi
 


Yes but to keep weapons away to what end? Is the USA building an empire across the globe? If you apply that logic to the US citizens that could potentially be enemies of the US government, would it be acceptable to take their guns away?



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 10:43 PM
link   
reply to post by superman2012
 


"Well, what if the US government wants to do a preemptive strike against the US citizens to protect them. Take away all their guns? Wouldn't that be the same thing? (Not literally, just in spirit the same thing.)

Also, with China pursuing Thorium as a fuel, we wouldn't even have to worry about issues like Iran."

Pre-emptive strike against the US citizens??? That is an insane thought. No one is talking about taking away ALL THE GUNS. They are talking about re-instating an assault rifle ban, they are talking about banning high-capacity magazines, but people will still be able to have guns. Just not the kind that let teenagers walk into crowded schools like playing an MMORPG and just start spraying lead.

It's not the same thing at all because even (and this is the most ridiculous hypothetical ever) if the US Govt did/could/wanted to do that, you are talking the difference between acting on behalf of the safety of your own citizens with regards to a dangerous device as opposed to a weapon of mass destruction in the control of another country that by way of owning one, threatens the political stability of it's neighbors as well as the lives of millions all at once.

China pursuing thorium...hmmm. Sounds like comic book stuff to me, but I'll tell you something. Whatever China is investigating you can bet there are dozens of US military programs we don't know about that are just as lethal if not moreso.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 10:46 PM
link   
reply to post by superman2012
 


I know, let's imprison everyone with computers keeping them docile with iPhone apps so they won't have time to organize and take over the government.

Angry Birds takes on a whole new meaning there, doesn't it?



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 10:49 PM
link   
reply to post by skyzeagle
 





Pre-emptive strike against the US citizens??? That is an insane thought. No one is talking about taking away ALL THE GUNS. They are talking about re-instating an assault rifle ban, they are talking about banning high-capacity magazines, but people will still be able to have guns. Just not the kind that let teenagers walk into crowded schools like playing an MMORPG and just start spraying lead.


Doesn't that seem like a slippery slope to you? It sure does to me. What happens when a teenager walks into a school with 5 handguns and magazines? A hunting rifle? A shotgun? Where does it end and at what point would it be unacceptable? I hope you didn't take that "preemptive strike" as a literal "attacking the US citizens", I meant it as preemptively taking their guns away so they don't hurt themselves or others.




It's not the same thing at all because even (and this is the most ridiculous hypothetical ever) if the US Govt did/could/wanted to do that, you are talking the difference between acting on behalf of the safety of your own citizens with regards to a dangerous device as opposed to a weapon of mass destruction in the control of another country that by way of owning one, threatens the political stability of it's neighbors as well as the lives of millions all at once.

Right, and if you read the thread I do agree with you. This isn't about guns vs nuclear bombs, which can kill the most. It is about the hypocrisy surrounding the two issues. Please go back and read and digest the information.



China pursuing thorium...hmmm. Sounds like comic book stuff to me, but I'll tell you something. Whatever China is investigating you can bet there are dozens of US military programs we don't know about that are just as lethal if not moreso.

Not quite. Read and learn.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 10:50 PM
link   
reply to post by skyzeagle
 


"Ok, try to obfuscate the issue as much as you can, I can tell you don't want to actually discuss this as you are fixated on Superman's lineage.

PS- Born on Krypton, which isn't part of the USA yet."

Jealous because your Canadian-born dude decided to create Superman in Cleveland instead of Toronto. LMFAO.

And frankly, you should read my posts. They are intelligent and cogent instead of sophomoric one or two liners about how great Canada is or how reactive the United States is. You're probably just irritated because Canada doesn't have the nuts to do a fraction of the stuff that the United States can do and does do on your behalf.

You're welcome.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 10:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by skyzeagle
reply to post by superman2012
 


I know, let's imprison everyone with computers keeping them docile with iPhone apps so they won't have time to organize and take over the government.

Angry Birds takes on a whole new meaning there, doesn't it?


Don't you have school tomorrow? Isn't it getting late? If you want to discuss the issue at hand, I am completely ready to. If you want to try to draw parallels to Angry Birds then you can do that tomorrow at lunch with your friends.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 10:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by skyzeagle
reply to post by skyzeagle
 


"Ok, try to obfuscate the issue as much as you can, I can tell you don't want to actually discuss this as you are fixated on Superman's lineage.

PS- Born on Krypton, which isn't part of the USA yet."

Jealous because your Canadian-born dude decided to create Superman in Cleveland instead of Toronto. LMFAO.

And frankly, you should read my posts. They are intelligent and cogent instead of sophomoric one or two liners about how great Canada is or how reactive the United States is. You're probably just irritated because Canada doesn't have the nuts to do a fraction of the stuff that the United States can do and does do on your behalf.

You're welcome.


See above.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 10:53 PM
link   
reply to post by superman2012
 


So the thorium argument is this: America sucks because we're trying to make things better about guns. (something I actually agree with you on, I think.)

The Chinese are better than Americans, so therefore America sucks more.

Ergo: Americans need thorium powered guns.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 10:54 PM
link   
reply to post by superman2012
 


Or, "I'll roll my eyes like brad pitt in a conspiracy forum until he sees how effing cool I am."

Bravo (slow clap.)

See....wherever you want, man. You're apparently always correctamundo.
edit on 1/9/2013 by skyzeagle because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 10:58 PM
link   
reply to post by skyzeagle
 


I'll take legen, wait for it,....dary movies for 5000 please Alex.

What is Twelve Monkeys?



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 11:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by superman2012

Originally posted by ADVISOR
Personally, as an individual and American, I see no reason they they can not be.

I do not buy into all the propaganda media circus hype about Ahmadinejad, and have the same professional respect for him as Putin or George sr, of course two of these mentioned were intel officers and presidents of their respective nations, but my point should be conveyed.

Show me evidence of the contrary and I may, reconsider. Of course it hasn't happened as of yet.



So, are you saying, if they are developing/have developed nuclear bombs you would support a pre-emptive attack on them?


Preemptive strike is another word for I want to start a war. A barking dog doesn't always bite. North Korea was building nukes and threatening our ally and we never attacked them. They have nukes now and haven't used them. There is no logical reason for America to attack Iran.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 11:03 PM
link   
reply to post by ADVISOR
 


I'm sorry. The correct answer is "Meet Joe Thorium".





new topics

top topics



 
41
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join