NationStates Jolt Archive

where is the "none of the above" option?
I agree..

the "NONE-of-the-avobe" option is the most important one.. such a POLL is NOT complete without this option.

Holy thread-cloning Batman!

I don't trust anybody with nukes and other WMD. Period.

The West is rational and still slightly moral. I would prefer to live like Hobbits, but since we have the WMD's its better that the good guys have them to deter the bad. And when the West falls to immorality or insanity, then it's the responsibility of those remaining who are rational and moral to give the technology to the new good guys to deter the then evil West.

None of the above, but only because of the use of absolutes in the above choices.

Wait ... this thread only has ONE '#' in front of the title ... is it special?

I trust pretty much anyone with nukes, because if they use them they're going to cease to exist within a few minutes; the other stuff like chem/bio I trust no one with because they are both too difficult to detect and too easy to accquire compared to nuclear technology, which requires a large amount of advanced (and easily monitorable) nuclear technology.

I trust everyone with nuclear power, although I would prefer new nations seeking to enrich uranium for new power facilities agree to an initial period of inspection and delayment of uranium processing until the program can be verified to be peaceful and up to international standards.

No one. The risk is just too high.

Wait ... this thread only has ONE '#' in front of the title ... is it special?yes it is special..
its a code means no counter-reply studied.. and no pre-research..
(I have no hidden aces wainting on my cards... no counter punches ready)..

its like a post that I just poped in there.. without thinking about it..

I don't trust my neighbor with his legally purchased and fully register handgun, why in this universe would I trust politicians and warmongers with WMD - especially Nukes and Bio/Chem Weapons....

Well, considering the fact that they may cause armageddon if used, are there any UN bans on WMDs or strict regulations?

I may submit one.

I would say I trust only the US, since I am an American. They would be less likely to blow me up since I am one of them, and more likely to blow up people trying to blow me up. Of course they might blow me up regardless, so I only trust them 52%.

why in this universe would I trust politicians with WMD - especially Nukes and Bio/Chem Weapons....I agree.

when you say you trust N-Korea with WMD.. the person who has the power to use the WMD is Kim..

So in real terms you are trusting WMD to the likes of (insert name of president or dictator) Putin, Blair, Chirac, and... Bush.

I would say I trust only the US, since I am an American. They would be less likely to blow me up since I am one of them, and more likely to blow up people trying to blow me up. Of course they might blow me up regardless, so I only trust them 52%.I respect your choice.. and I am impresed with your guts..

Since you are actually trusting the Comander-in-chief of the Armed forces... with an arsenal capable of destroying the human race.

It does takes a lot guts... or naivity

Me? I would not trust a monkey with a couple of sharp scisors. ;)

Wait ... this thread only has ONE '#' in front of the title ... is it special?
He forgot his tinfoil hat when he was typing and the Bush mind control got to him.

Tonga.

He forgot his tinfoil hat when he was typing and the Bush mind control got to him.

Heavily influenced by the International Zionist Conspiracy, no doubt.

Heavily influenced by the International Zionist Conspiracy, no doubt.

If it were the IZC, the # would be replaced by $ for we all know that Zionists are obsessed with wealth.

The West is rational and still slightly moral. I would prefer to live like Hobbits, but since we have the WMD's its better that the good guys have them to deter the bad. And when the West falls to immorality or insanity, then it's the responsibility of those remaining who are rational and moral to give the technology to the new good guys to deter the then evil West.

How about EVERYONE has an equal/fair # of nukes? that way, no one can use them with out being nuked equally. They'd all cancel out.

How about EVERYONE has an equal/fair # of nukes? that way, no one can use them with out being nuked equally. They'd all cancel out.fair enough..

and that would be Poll option #9

Nuclear weapons have done nothing but perpetuate peace for the last sixty years. Everyone should have some.

Anyone ever see that movie where the scientist builds his "ultimate weapon" which he intends to distribute to ever nation on earth (because then there will be no more war, as everyone will be too afraid of it), but then this other scientist (who happens to be an asshole and a proto-hippy) gets all paranoid and sabotages the space ship that the first scientist is on, and so everyone on the ship is going to die?
Yeah, I've never been able to stay awake long enough to see the end of that movie, but the equal distribution of Dooms Day technology is right in line with my beliefs on multilateral nuclear armanent. Neither biological nor chemical weapons are worth a damn on the battlefield, so they should be scrapped completely.

I "trust" the following nations with nuclear weapons.

United States
United Kingdom
France
Russia
China



That's it...nobody else should have them. I don't trust India, Pakistan, Israel, Iran, North Korea, or Luxembourg with even one of the damn things.

I think the none of the above. Though someone will have them. I would prefer the 'West' (sorry non westies) to have them more than say Iran or North Korrea.

I think the none of the above. Though someone will have them. I would prefer the 'West' (sorry non westies) to have them more than say Iran or North Korrea."westies"? (just curious)

Defcon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defcon_%28computer_game%29) will be released this month. Then we can see who we can trust with nukes. :)

I certainly dont trust any of those wackos from cn

In highminded theory, everyone should have them. Reduces countries interfering with each other, promotes a type of peace.

In dirty reality, the west - that's the culture I'm from and want to have the most advantages, they're the ones with the most trustworthy _not_ to use them in a political fit of pique.

Damn. That's 2 answers.

Nuclear weapons have done nothing but perpetuate peace for the last sixty years. Everyone should have some.
http://www.angryflower.com/golden.gif
(For the second time in a week ;) )

Defcon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defcon_%28computer_game%29) will be released this month. Then we can see who we can trust with nukes. :)
I love their URL. www.everybody-dies.com (http://www.everybody-dies.com). Excellent.

*nod* (http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/end.php)

That should answer your question

I trust any nation that OcceanDrive hates with nukes. My reasoning is that OcceanDrive seems to have great hate for the US and its allies.

Any nation that OcceanDrive has a hard on for should not be allowed to have nukes. My reasoning is that he loves any rogue nation that hates the US or its allies.

None. Why? Because power corrupts, and no person is free from good or evil, so none of them can truly be trusted.

I don't trust anybody with nukes and other WMD. Period.
$: cat Dobbsworld.opinion

Perhaps we should call any country that has a WMD as a threat to world peace and stability. Anyone who would want to have such weapons is obviously a potential threat.

How about EVERYONE has an equal/fair # of nukes? that way, no one can use them with out being nuked equally. They'd all cancel out.

No.

Some would develop faster and accurate means of delivery with more reach (ICBMs, MIRVs etc) and some would develop measures against other's delivery system. What do you do then? Give all nations ICBMs and MIRVs ?

Then there is the issue of states using proxy non-state actors and giving them nukes to play the plausible deniability game.

I say we clone Ghandi and give him all the nukes.

Personally, I'd rather see those fucking weapons gone, once and for all.

This is part of why I support research into Anti-Ballistic Missile technology. Once you make the damn things obsolete, they'll go away.

Personally, I'd rather see those fucking weapons gone, once and for all.

This is part of why I support research into Anti-Ballistic Missile technology. Once you make the damn things obsolete, they'll go away.
I believe at one point the same was thought with swords and armor. And submarines and submarine-killers. And Superdreadnaughts and Superdreadnaught-Killers. Guess what happened....