NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.guardian.co.uk/georgia/story/0,,1998753,00.html

You know how some folks are concerned that Russia's weapons grade uranium and plutonium might not be all that securely stored? Well guess what? Some Russian dude was recently caught in Georgia with a sample pack of 100 grams of weapons grade uranium. He was planning to sell several kilograms that he had access to back home. I'm surprised nobody's made a thread about this yet. So, when is the first terrorist nuke going to go off and how many nations will the US vaporise in response?

BTW, I'm in favor of nuking any nation that supports terrorists who use nuclear weapons. It's a good deterrant. You may not be able to threaten the guy who wants to die as long as he gets to go out with a bang, but you can scare the shit out of any nation that is otherwise willing to train, fund and equip him.

I saw an article where someone stole a replica atom bomb from Los Alamos. The look on their faces after they got back must have been priceless :D

http://www.guardian.co.uk/georgia/story/0,,1998753,00.html

You know how some folks are concerned that Russia's weapons grade uranium and plutonium might not be all that securely stored? Well guess what? Some Russian dude was recently caught in Georgia with a sample pack of 100 grams of weapons grade uranium. He was planning to sell several kilograms that he had access to back home. I'm surprised nobody's made a thread about this yet. So, when is the first terrorist nuke going to go off and how many nations will the US vaporise in response?

BTW, I'm in favor of nuking any nation that supports terrorists who use nuclear weapons. It's a good deterrant. You may not be able to threaten the guy who wants to die as long as he gets to go out with a bang, but you can scare the shit out of any nation that is otherwise willing to train, fund and equip him.
Sorry do sound demonic, but the sooner, the better! I'm sick of hearing the same old, same old (global warming, iraq, etc). Gimme something worth watching the news for! :D

what i thought when i heard this story a couple days ago is that there must be people stationed all over the world whose job it is to pretend to be nuclear buyers. and they must be very good. these guys had to believe that they werent stepping into some kind of trap.

We're all going to die!!!

We're all going to die!!!

Thank you for your optimistic lookout. </sarcasm>

We're all going to die!!!

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y239/NuGo1988/Wearegoingtodie.gif

BTW, I'm in favor of nuking any nation that supports terrorists who use nuclear weapons. It's a good deterrant. You may not be able to threaten the guy who wants to die as long as he gets to go out with a bang, but you can scare the shit out of any nation that is otherwise willing to train, fund and equip him.

Yeah, but how exactly do you determine who "supports terrorists?"

The same way the US determined that invading Iraq was a good thing?

Yeah, but how exactly do you determine who "supports terrorists?"

Reading animal entrails and tea leaves.

Yeah, but how exactly do you determine who "supports terrorists?"

Anyone who doesn't sleep with me, when I ask them to, is a terrorist. Easy.

Reading animal entrails and tea leaves.

Anyone who doesn't sleep with me, when I ask them to, is a terrorist. Easy.

Two such good choices. This is quite a dilemma. :(

Anyone who doesn't sleep with me, when I ask them to, is a terrorist. Easy.

Yeah, your one is better.

Reading animal entrails and tea leaves.

Anyone who doesn't sleep with me, when I ask them to, is a terrorist. Easy.

Sex and ritual disembowelment. Always a great combo! :)

Two such good choices. This is quite a dilemma. :(
Pick mine! Or I'll ask you to sleep with me. ;)
Yeah, your one is better.
To act like a condescending bastard, or to not.... that is the question.

Sex and ritual disembowelment. Always a great combo! :)

Swap the order round and it sounds like a great party I was at once.

Swap the order round and it sounds like a great party I was at once.

The original order is more reminiscent of the mating habits of the praying mantis.

Yeah, but how exactly do you determine who "supports terrorists?"

The same way the US determined that invading Iraq was a good thing?

No, the way we determined the taliban were supporting Al Qaeda and the way we know that Iran supports Hezbollah. You know, using data to come to a conclusion rather than coming to a conclusion first then searching for data that might back it up.

No, the way we determined the taliban were supporting Al Qaeda and the way we know that Iran supports Hezbollah. You know, using data to come to a conclusion rather than coming to a conclusion first then searching for data that might back it up.

And you honestly think that a country that has a practiced history of the latter is going to suddenly do the former when it comes to nuking someone? Here we are, in a fit of rage and grief, with the worst terrorist attack in history - a nuke on American soil - and you think our government or ANYONE is going to be thoughtful and rational?

The original order is more reminiscent of the mating habits of the praying mantis.

Yeah, IMS the female decapiates the male pre-coitus.

And you honestly think that a country that has a practiced history of the latter is going to suddenly do the former when it comes to nuking someone? Here we are, in a fit of rage and grief, with the worst terrorist attack in history - a nuke on American soil - and you think our government or ANYONE is going to be thoughtful and rational?

We were pretty rational after 9/11. Offered to let the taliban off the hook if they turned over the Al Qaeda leadership, then waged a conventional war when they didn't rather than losing our shit and nuking them.

Yeah, IMS the female decapiates the male pre-coitus.

Decapitation, disembowelment, all in a day's work.

Anyway, I may as well stop spamming now. I think that's more posts at one time than I've ever made before with this nation.

Decapitation, disembowelment, all in a day's work.

Anyway, I may as well stop spamming now. I think that's more posts at one time than I've ever made before with this nation.

I've infected you with spam, you'll become a spammer in no time.


We are The Spammers. Your post count and amusing pictures will be added to our own. Resistence is futile. +1.

BTW, I'm in favor of nuking any nation that supports terrorists who use nuclear weapons. It's a good deterrant. You may not be able to threaten the guy who wants to die as long as he gets to go out with a bang, but you can scare the shit out of any nation that is otherwise willing to train, fund and equip him.

First nation to use nuclear bombs to terrorize populations and to make a point = the United States of America.

Okay, I'm game.

First nation to use nuclear bombs to terrorize populations and to make a point = the United States of America.

Okay, I'm game.

So what? I'm not concerned about what the US did, with good reason in my opinion, in the 1940s. I'm concerned about what we're going to do in the future.

I'm concerned about what we're going to do in the future.

Either something really stupid or something really brilliant, going by our track record.

So what? I'm not concerned about what the US did, with good reason in my opinion, in the 1940s. I'm concerned about what we're going to do in the future.

Sorry, no statute of limitations for terrorism. Hand whoever bombed the cities or you'll get nuked. :D

Either something really stupid or something really brilliant, going by our track record.

Remind me, who's your current president again?

Sorry, no statute of limitations for terrorism. Hand whoever bombed the cities or you'll get nuked. :D
It wasn't terrorism, it was war. Whatever.
Grab a shovel and come dig them up tough guy.

It wasn't terrorism, it was war. Whatever.
Grab a shovel and come dig them up tough guy.

Funny, Al Qaeda can claim the same thing.

And there are some of those still alive. :p

Remind me, who's your current president again?

Someone really stupid. I'm going by the last 228 years.

And there are some of those still alive. :p
Nah, I'm pretty sure they're all dead. The last one living was one of the pilots, oddly enough.

Someone really stupid. I'm going by the last 228 years.

That was my point.

Funny, Al Qaeda can claim the same thing.

And there are some of those still alive. :p

No they can't. Al Qaeda's attack on the twin towers was a pure act of terrorism. They had no military value. Hiroshima and Nagasaki had shipyards and military industrial facilities. The US did what it did to bring the war to a swift, unconditional end. Al Quaeda's state goal is to kill some 4 million Americans on the way to building a new caliphate that will spread their fucked up version of Islam worldwide. See the difference? If not I can't help you.

.. but we are... eventually...

Not I, at least not from age. Of course, this hinges on a lot of what-ifs, but I'm banking on immortality and eternal youth.

Hope for the best and plan for the worst, as they say.

Thank you for your optimistic lookout. </sarcasm>

.. but we are... eventually...

No they can't. Al Qaeda's attack on the twin towers was a pure act of terrorism. They had no military value. Hiroshima and Nagasaki had shipyards and military industrial facilities. The US did what it did to bring the war to a swift, unconditional end. Al Quaeda's state goal is to kill some 4 million Americans on the way to building a new caliphate that will spread their fucked up version of Islam worldwide. See the difference? If not I can't help you.

Nagasaki was bombed because Kokura had bad visibility! That had nothing to do with military strategy and everything to do with making a point to Russia.

Either something really stupid or something really brilliant, going by our track record.

Most likely. When you're playing around with nukes, there is no such thing as "kind of stupid".

Nagasaki was bombed because Kokura had bad visibility! That had nothing to do with military strategy and everything to do with making a point to Russia.

Few details are available on how Nagasaki was picked, but the city contained two arms factories, a steel works and the massive Mitsubishi shipyards. One factory made some of the torpedoes used on Pearl Harbor.http://archive.tri-cityherald.com/BOMB/bomb16.html

http://archive.tri-cityherald.com/BOMB/bomb16.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kokura#History

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kokura#History

I'm not disputing that Nagasaki was a backup target, only saying that it did have military value. It's not like cities were nuked randomly. They were chosen for their military value and the likelihood that the bombing run would be successful.

I'm not disputing that Nagasaki was a backup target, only saying that it did have military value. It's not like cities were nuked randomly. They were chosen for their military value and the likelihood that the bombing run would be successful.

And the "let's make a point to the USSR" thing.

I'm not disputing that Nagasaki was a backup target, only saying that it did have military value.
Practically every city in the world has military value.

And the "let's make a point to the USSR" thing.

Though that certainly would have been a consideration in using the bomb it still doesn't change the fact that the primary purpose was to win a quick and unconditional surrender from Japan and failing that to cripple their military industry. It was an attack against military targets.

Practically every city in the world has military value.

Yeah, but some a lot more than others. Magnitogorsk and Krasnoyarsk were a lot more important to the Soviet war effort than Moscow or Leningrad, for example.

Though that certainly would have been a consideration in using the bomb it still doesn't change the fact that the primary purpose was to win a quick and unconditional surrender from Japan and failing that to cripple their military industry. It was an attack against military targets.

Too bad there were those thousands of civilians around, eh? Why not find a purely military base?

Too bad there were those thousands of civilians around, eh? Why not find a purely military base?

I don't know. Maybe they were all pretty well bombed out and now it was time to destroy the facilities that could rebuild them. Maybe using a nuclear weapon on one single target wouldn't be as efficient as using a nuclear weapon in an environment rich with military targets to kill many birds with one stone.

Anyway, Heikoku, are you trying to say that because of what it did during a world war the US either deserves to be attacked with nuclear weapons? That we should just shut up and take it?

I'd say this is a big enough concern that the U.N. should devote funding and man power to securing those nuclear materials.

The Nagasaki and Hiroshima bombings were completely unfounded, but punishing American for them today seems pointless. Almost anyone who had anything to do with that decision is dead or so old they aren't actively involved in...anything anymore.

Don't forget that the Japanese committed more, and worse, atrocities than the U.S. did.

Anyway, Heikoku, are you trying to say that because of what it did during a world war the US either deserves to be attacked with nuclear weapons? That we should just shut up and take it?

No, I'm saying that, before going nuke-crazy on any country that you claim supports nuke terrorists, remember US has been one as well. So, you do NOT deserve to be attacked with nuclear weapons, but you don't deserve the right to attack people with them.

No, I'm saying that, before going nuke-crazy on any country that you claim supports nuke terrorists, remember US has been one as well. So, you do NOT deserve to be attacked with nuclear weapons, but you don't deserve the right to attack people with them.

Sure we deserve the right to attack people with them if they're responsible for us getting attacked with them first. That's what MAD was all about. The idea that a nuclear attack on the US will result in the nuclear annihilation of those who attacked us kept the peace between the US and Soviets through the whole cold war.

I don't know. Maybe they were all pretty well bombed out and now it was time to destroy the facilities that could rebuild them. Maybe using a nuclear weapon on one single target wouldn't be as efficient as using a nuclear weapon in an environment rich with military targets to kill many birds with one stone.

Conventional weaponry would work better on military targets than nuclear weaponry. Because nukes detonate in the air, they have a harder time destroying buildings than the equivalent amount of conventional explosives.

Sure we deserve the right to attack people with them if they're responsible for us getting attacked with them first. That's what MAD was all about. The idea that a nuclear attack on the US will result in the nuclear annihilation of those who attacked us kept the peace between the US and Soviets through the whole cold war.

In that case, had Japan developed a nuke and attacked the US at that time, I'm sure you'd hold no grudges towards Japan now?