NationStates Jolt Archive

Think about this for a second. The United States is the most powerful country in the world. We have most of the nukes. We have the best technology. We are the richest nation. Why are we wasting money to fund the military when there is no one who is strong enough to defeat us. Also what enemies do we have that can take us down?

Think about this for a second. The United States is the most powerful country in the world. We have most of the nukes. We have the best technology. We are the richest nation. Why are we wasting money to fund the military when there is no one who is strong enough to defeat us. Also what enemies do we have that can take us down?
You suffer from a lack of understanding, not only of modern warfare but of the basic nature of man. I suggest you read up on the topics.

Think about this for a second. The United States is the most powerful country in the world. We have most of the nukes. We have the best technology. We are the richest nation. Why are we wasting money to fund the military when there is no one who is strong enough to defeat us. Also what enemies do we have that can take us down?
If we didn't have the military, people WOULD take us down.

Plenty of people hate the US.

The military is like toilet paper. Not much use for anything else, but when you need it, you really need it.

If we didn't have a military after 9/11 what could we have done to try to disrupt Al Quaeda? Perhaps we could have asked the UN for assistance. :rolleyes:

If we didn't have the military, people WOULD take us down.

Plenty of people hate the US.

The military is like toilet paper. Not much use for anything else, but when you need it, you really need it.
That's an interesting simile! I kind of like it!

Seriously though, if the US didn't have an army, we Canadians would invade, make you all speak French, wear socks with sandals, drink good Canadian Rye, snowboard instead of surf, have sex with Quebecois women, smoke legal weed, have a gay marriage then happily divorce, and get some money with some friggin' personality instead of those ugly greenbacks you all carry around! Doesn't that sound appealing? LAY DOWN YOUR ARMS AND BE ASSIMLIATED!!!!

I think the question should have been asking why do we beed nukes?

If we didn't have a military after 9/11 what could we have done to try to disrupt Al Quaeda? Perhaps we could have asked the UN for assistance. :rolleyes:

You make a good point. I love our military, I would join up myself if medical problems did not prevent it.

That's an interesting simile! I kind of like it!

Seriously though, if the US didn't have an army, we Canadians would invade, make you all speak French, wear socks with sandals, drink good Canadian Rye, snowboard instead of surf, have sex with Quebecois women, smoke legal weed, have a gay marriage then happily divorce, and get some money with some friggin' personality instead of those ugly greenbacks you all carry around! Doesn't that sound appealing? LAY DOWN YOUR ARMS AND BE ASSIMLIATED!!!!

That-I couldnt stand, eh? Maybe thats what hell will be like when I get there.

That's an interesting simile! I kind of like it!

Seriously though, if the US didn't have an army, we Canadians would invade, make you all speak French, wear socks with sandals, drink good Canadian Rye, snowboard instead of surf, have sex with Quebecois women, smoke legal weed, have a gay marriage then happily divorce, and get some money with some friggin' personality instead of those ugly greenbacks you all carry around! Doesn't that sound appealing? LAY DOWN YOUR ARMS AND BE ASSIMLIATED!!!!

LMAO. My dad is from Canada and he wears sock with his sandals.
Gotta love it!! :D

I also loved your simile, Whispering Legs. :D

If we didn't have the military, people WOULD take us down.

Plenty of people hate the US.

The military is like toilet paper. Not much use for anything else, but when you need it, you really need it.


Uh-a lot of the people on the forum may not use toilet paper.

Think about this for a second. The United States is the most powerful country in the world. We have most of the nukes. We have the best technology. We are the richest nation. Why are we wasting money to fund the military when there is no one who is strong enough to defeat us. Also what enemies do we have that can take us down?



Just the presence of a large, well trained and effective military, able to be deployed anywhere in the world in a short period of time discourages aggressive action toward us in most cases. Without it, you could kiss the style of life you've become accustomed to goodbye.
We have a lot of enemies that can poke us in the eye, but none that could "take us down".

Seriously though, if the US didn't have an army, we Canadians would invade, make you all speak French, wear socks with sandals, drink good Canadian Rye, snowboard instead of surf, have sex with Quebecois women, smoke legal weed, have a gay marriage then happily divorce, and get some money with some friggin' personality instead of those ugly greenbacks you all carry around! Doesn't that sound appealing? LAY DOWN YOUR ARMS AND BE ASSIMLIATED!!!!
it really isn't that bad!

It's so good, eh? Besides...think about; fewer guns and colourful money that you can accidently get mixed up with your Canadian Tire money if you're not careful; plus all the Celine Dion, Tom Cochrane and Tragically Hip you can handle, and if that isn't enough,there is also the Guess Who!

Think about this for a second. The United States is the most powerful country in the world. We have most of the nukes. We have the best technology. We are the richest nation. Why are we wasting money to fund the military when there is no one who is strong enough to defeat us. Also what enemies do we have that can take us down?

We will always require conventional military forces, unfortunately. Tactical nuclear devices provide a general deterent, but cannot protect the host country against infiltration and domestic military action; meaning, of course, that you cannot protect against the deployment of forces on your home territory unless you are prepared to use nuclear devices on your own residents.

Further, it is always better to use graduated military force; start with conventional, and use tactical nuclear only as a last resort. The goal of warfare is not mass killing or complete annihalation; it is the demoralization and eventual surrender of the enemy country via display of overwhelming force and strategic superiority. Conventional warfare, if conducted competently, allows you to accomplish this goal while keeping casualties to the lowest rate possible.

have sex with Quebecois women!
hey! dem frenchified womenfolk gots da hairy pits!

We will always require conventional military forces, unfortunately. Tactical nuclear devices provide a general deterent, but cannot protect the host country against infiltration and domestic military action; meaning, of course, that you cannot protect against the deployment of forces on your home territory unless you are prepared to use nuclear devices on your own residents.

Further, it is always better to use graduated military force; start with conventional, and use tactical nuclear only as a last resort. The goal of warfare is not mass killing or complete annihalation; it is the demoralization and eventual surrender of the enemy country via display of overwhelming force and strategic superiority. Conventional warfare, if conducted competently, allows you to accomplish this goal while keeping casualties to the lowest rate possible.
Nah, tactical nukes aren't a deterant. They're weapons of war. Strategic nuclear weapons, weapons that can turn cities into burning radioactive ruins, those are a nice deterant. Tactical nukes are just good for wiping out military instalations and large numbers of enemy tanks and soldiers.

there is also the Guess Who!
Okay, I'll guess....um....the um....the Rankins? :p

Think about this for a second. The United States is the most powerful country in the world. We have most of the nukes. We have the best technology. We are the richest nation. Why are we wasting money to fund the military when there is no one who is strong enough to defeat us. Also what enemies do we have that can take us down?

We must remember that our military force is also present to protect our alies. I believe the question is can we have less military power and still be able to protect our allies WHILE protecting ourselves should the case arise?

Indeed we are the best of the best in many fields, however, as 9/11 demonstrated, we are vulnerable by having this power because it makes others feel inferior and threatened who are not under our protection, but this is not a reason to reduce our power.

Think of the US as a dinosaur egg. There are many eggs in the world, different sizes, colors, differnt strengths of the shell, and different origins, however they all have a soft inside. We have built a strong shell and are the most well rounded egg, however, the smallest worm can get through the shell and to the soft inside, infecting the egg as a whole from within. The bigger the egg, the more tempting it is for the worm.

So do we make our core stronger...or our egg smaller to prevent the envy of evil?

wear socks with sandals

I do this. It scares me. I will chock that up to being sensitive to Canadian culture.

In response to the original question: It's not worth an answer. Research and look, study something before you ask a question. Think about it from other peoples' point of view. Treat it like chess. If you don't play Chess now, pick up a game a start. It's not that hard, you'll enjoy the critical thinking.

Nah, tactical nukes aren't a deterant. They're weapons of war. Strategic nuclear weapons, weapons that can turn cities into burning radioactive ruins, those are a nice deterant. Tactical nukes are just good for wiping out military instalations and large numbers of enemy tanks and soldiers.

Exactly! People these days need to realize that today’s nukes aren't the same things that where used in Japan. Today we have nukes that can make land uninhabitable for decades and we ALSO have nukes that you can walk in the ruins the following day with no risk. We have them that can wipe out entire cities and then some and we ALSO have nukes that can surgically remove a very specific part of a city.

Today simply the word “nuke” seems to simply evoke irrational paranoia and head-in-the-sand ignorance, sad really.

Think about this for a second. The United States is the most powerful country in the world. We have most of the nukes. We have the best technology. We are the richest nation. Why are we wasting money to fund the military when there is no one who is strong enough to defeat us. Also what enemies do we have that can take us down?
Ya can't just nuke the bad guys. If you take away conventional forces, that what y'all would have to do.

Ya can't just nuke the bad guys. If you take away conventional forces, that what y'all would have to do.
:p That's actually a good argument for eliminating the conventional forces. :p

Nah, tactical nukes aren't a deterant. They're weapons of war. Strategic nuclear weapons, weapons that can turn cities into burning radioactive ruins, those are a nice deterant. Tactical nukes are just good for wiping out military instalations and large numbers of enemy tanks and soldiers.

You are correct, sir. Tactical, in this context, does equal "battlefied" weaponry. I should have been more careful in how I phrased this response. Having said this, however, I think we agree on the general point.

Nuclear weaponry, whether strategically or tactically employed, can never replace convention military forces.