!! Nuclear Power ?

[Axl_owns_dexter]

what about teh "thou shall not kill ? " thingie

Go tell that to one of the guys who fought the hellish battles on Iwo Jima.

[Where is Hassan Nasrallah ?]

the only solution is to move backwards : remove the bombs from everywhere. and the powerfull countries needs to show the way.

Ok so if the US and Russia get rid of all their nukes, that means everyone else will just play fair and get rid of theirs? 

Ofcourse, they would never take advantage of the situation.   

so let's not be hypocritical and call out iran or what ever country... just like the teacher hitting the kids to tell them not to fight ....

[Jamie]

I do agree that most countries can't be trusted with them.?

Correction, no countries can be trusted with them. I think the use of nuclear weaponry in the second world war proved that, the 'world police' and international good guys America used them to attack Japan and wiped out a large quantity of the population in the cities they were used on. They are unsafe and deadly, regardless if it is America, Britain, Iraq, India, anyone who has them in their posession.

[Axl_owns_dexter]

I think the use of nuclear weaponry in the second world war proved that, the 'world police' and international good guys America used them to attack Japan and wiped out a large quantity of the population

Like I said before, Japan was going to be firebombed to hell by the allies.  Would you have prefered Japan to have been firebombed to hell and invaded on top of that?  Would that have been a "nicer" end to the war?

[Axl_owns_dexter]

so let's not be hypocritical and call out iran or what ever country... just like the teacher hitting the kids to tell them not to fight ...

In an international context, your statement means absolutely nothing.  Like I said, just because the Big Boys get rid of their nukes, doesn't mean everyone will follow suit.  In fact, I gaurantee you that the other countries (Iran, North Korea) would use the clout of having the bomb to push their agenda.  Is that what you want?  Do you want a rogue dictator like the psycho in North Korea to have nukes at his disposal to push his perverted agenda?

Think rationally about it.  Don't resort to silly metaphors that mean jack.

[Where is Hassan Nasrallah ?]

so let's not be hypocritical and call out iran or what ever country... just like the teacher hitting the kids to tell them not to fight ...

In an international context, your statement means absolutely nothing.  Like I said, just because the Big Boys get rid of their nukes, doesn't mean everyone will follow suit.  In fact, I gaurantee you that the other countries (Iran, North Korea) would use the clout of having the bomb to push their agenda.  Is that what you want?  Do you want a rogue dictator like the psycho in North Korea to have nukes at his disposal to push his perverted agenda?

Think rationally about it.  Don't resort to silly metaphors that mean jack.

well my point was that we are trying to use ethical method to ask some countries to get rid of the bomb ... and you prove that it doesnt work.

politics at this level is not rational. power and authority relations are not rational.

[Jamie]

I think the use of nuclear weaponry in the second world war proved that, the 'world police' and international good guys America used them to attack Japan and wiped out a large quantity of the population

Like I said before, Japan was going to be firebombed to hell by the allies.? Would you have prefered Japan to have been firebombed to hell and invaded on top of that?? Would that have been a "nicer" end to the war?

I never suggested that Japan be bombed and invaded, in fact I never suggested either one, but since you have brought it up, I am of the opinion that America send troops into Japan to remove the dictator that was in power. What the fuck does bombing an entire city and killing many innocent people do? It's been the same in America's current "war on terror" of all the cities that were bombed to fuckin pieces in both Iraq and Afghanistan, how many major international terrorists were killed by direct consequence? None. How many innocent civilians? A hell of a lot more than none. It was the same case in Japan.

[Prometheus]

I think the use of nuclear weaponry in the second world war proved that, the 'world police' and international good guys America used them to attack Japan and wiped out a large quantity of the population

Like I said before, Japan was going to be firebombed to hell by the allies.? Would you have prefered Japan to have been firebombed to hell and invaded on top of that?? Would that have been a "nicer" end to the war?

I never suggested that Japan be bombed and invaded, in fact I never suggested either one, but since you have brought it up, I am of the opinion that America send troops into Japan to remove the dictator that was in power. What the fuck does bombing an entire city and killing many innocent people do? It's been the same in America's current "war on terror" of all the cities that were bombed to fuckin pieces in both Iraq and Afghanistan, how many major international terrorists were killed by direct consequence? None. How many innocent civilians? A hell of a lot more than none. It was the same case in Japan.

ok really do we need to open this arguement again..... went through this one not 3 months ago on here.........