Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Politicians

Politicians For topics and discussions about politicians, political leaders, or political figures


Thanks Tree44Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old February 4th, 2018, 06:40 AM   #31
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,134
Quote:
Originally Posted by BubbaJones View Post
According to earlier posts we have plenty of tritium on hand AND we have the ability to create more as we need it. I would assume we have been, and are continuing, to maintain our nuclear arsenal. I'm fine with that. I just don't see where we need massive new investment in our nuclear weapon systems.

Like I said, we alone, with no help from any other country, can render the earth a dead rock. We don't need more, or more powerful, weapons when we can obliterate all life on the planet.

I should have begun with a poll asking who is in favor of a nuclear build up and who is not.

Quote:
https://www.defensenews.com/breaking...next-30-years/
WASHINGTON ― The U.S. will need to spend $1.2 trillion over the next 30 years to modernize and maintain its nuclear weapons, according to a new government estimate.

The report, released Tuesday by the Congressional Budget Office, said the $1.2 trillion in 2017 dollars includes $800 billion to operate and sustain existing forces, and $400 billion to modernize them, through 2046.
How does that compare with what we spend on medical cost and Social Security? Like what kind of sense does it make to spend that much on weapons we hope to never use, instead of spending on our quality of life? If we do use those weapons who is going to survive?
Athena is online now  
Old February 4th, 2018, 11:00 AM   #32
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Alabama
Posts: 1,185
Quote:
Originally Posted by Athena View Post
Personally, I do not think we have ever had a worse president. Trump's fear-mongering speech last night has increased my sense of urgency that we dimish his powers as much as possible. I think increasing our nuclear capability and reactivating the nuclear arms race is the worst thing we could possibly do.

Beyond War is an international organization that has opposed nuclear weapons for many years and if we all support this organization and other efforts to end the threat of nuclear war, perhaps human reason can prevail over emotions and fear?



Which side are you on, the side of death or side of life?
Just suppose the american people elected a very passive president......lets just suppose the n. Korea leader launched a nuclear missile.....and lets just suppose the president did not have grit to give the word to fire back, what do think would happen?
You are being taught to fear.....
urbrother is offline  
Old February 4th, 2018, 11:08 AM   #33
Senior Member
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 58,275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Athena View Post
right to left, what do think should happen? It seems to me the more nukes are developed, the more the opposing side is pushed to do the same thing. If we stop doing this, then it stops, or would Russia continue to work on stronger and stronger nukes and better delivery systems?

I may be wrong, but I think intentionally working for world peace is the best way to go?
No one, including the Russians, needs to work on stronger nukes or better delivery systems. The nukes on hand and the delivery systems deployed are more than sufficient.
Gen. Paul Selva, the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, noted in testimony to the House Armed Services Committee in March 2017 that while Russia and China continue to modernize their nuclear forces, "we [the United States] do have a qualitative advantage." Similarly, Gen. John Hyten, the Commander of U.S. Strategic Command, told the Senate Armed Services Committee in April 2017, "the thing about deterrent capability is it doesn't matter how old [it is]." What matters is "whether it works."
https://www.armscontrol.org/factshee...rModernization

The Russian torpedos, whether real or not presently, are an example of a devastating weapon using "ancient" technology. If deployed and used, they'd work, and work on the cheap.

Another tactic occasionally discussed is an electromagnetic pulse [EMP] attack. Nukes send out a strong pulse of electromagnetic energy which can fry electronic equipment, everything from weapons systems to the power grid and possibly your car though probably not.

Here's the EMP kicker. Pure fission nukes, the oldest design, are more efficient than thermonuclear weapons, "H-bomb," in producing an EMP. This is why Kim has to be taken seriously. The odds of his actually hitting the US with a nuke is pretty close to slim to none. NK missiles tipped with nuclear warheads at this stage lack the hardware necessary for a warhead to survive re-entry.

But EMP bursts occur at very high altitudes avoiding the re-entry phase altogether. A single burst over our west coast would be devastating.

All that said, when it comes to nukes, low-budget options are available and easily deployed. Big US expenditures on our nukes have one purpose: funding the insatiable appetite of our military-industrial complex.
Thanks from Athena
imaginethat is online now  
Old February 4th, 2018, 11:38 AM   #34
end capitalism now
 
right to left's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,041
Quote:
Originally Posted by Athena View Post
right to left, what do think should happen? It seems to me the more nukes are developed, the more the opposing side is pushed to do the same thing. If we stop doing this, then it stops, or would Russia continue to work on stronger and stronger nukes and better delivery systems?

I may be wrong, but I think intentionally working for world peace is the best way to go?
Me too! But, Russia and China are much less willing to spend the kind of money on nukes that the US is(it will cost much more than one trillion if they follow the 10 year plan established under Obama. The US spends more per capita income on military and related spending than any other nation on earth.

Most of the motivation to keep building more nukes doesn't come from any realistic notions that more is better. It's just a matter of keep making more because the arms makers that own both political parties make money when they make nukes and missile systems and they don't make money when they're not producing.

This is not a "both sides do it" issue! Clear away the clutter and bullshit, and the US has become an empire that will not acknowledge that fact, and is unwilling to shut down military buildups for any reasons. This is now an empire bent on wars and creating failed states to justify the production of more weapons.
Thanks from Athena
right to left is offline  
Old February 5th, 2018, 08:01 AM   #35
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,134
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbrother View Post
Just suppose the american people elected a very passive president......lets just suppose the n. Korea leader launched a nuclear missile.....and lets just suppose the president did not have grit to give the word to fire back, what do think would happen?
You are being taught to fear.....
Do you realize, all of what you said comes from within you? What if the problem you imagine is in your head? I don't mean to be rude, but there is another way to see the world and our possibilities. What if we had a president who led us to peace as John Kennedy was attempting to do before he was assassinated? What if Joe Kennedy became president?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RKmiivRrBU

I think Trump is causing a problem, not resolving the problems caused by nuclear weapons. Why shouldn't North Korans agree with you and want the same thing?

Last edited by Athena; February 5th, 2018 at 08:41 AM.
Athena is online now  
Old February 5th, 2018, 08:24 AM   #36
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,134
Nuclear war is not acceptable and education is the only effective way to avoid a nuclear war. No matter where a nuclear bomb hits, there are global consequences and people around the world will die of starvation. We know this from experience.

We have one choice and only one choice. The choice is not your life but not theirs. The choice is life or death. Please, listen to a doctor's explanation of nuclear war.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ug-DJtvHFE0
Thanks from right to left
Athena is online now  
Old February 5th, 2018, 08:38 AM   #37
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,134
Quote:
Originally Posted by right to left View Post
Me too! But, Russia and China are much less willing to spend the kind of money on nukes that the US is(it will cost much more than one trillion if they follow the 10 year plan established under Obama. The US spends more per capita income on military and related spending than any other nation on earth.

Most of the motivation to keep building more nukes doesn't come from any realistic notions that more is better. It's just a matter of keep making more because the arms makers that own both political parties make money when they make nukes and missile systems and they don't make money when they're not producing.

This is not a "both sides do it" issue! Clear away the clutter and bullshit, and the US has become an empire that will not acknowledge that fact, and is unwilling to shut down military buildups for any reasons. This is now an empire bent on wars and creating failed states to justify the production of more weapons.
Once again I wish I could give more than one thank you. Nuclear war is insane and this link makes that clear https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tW7IgKJWtqk .

People who think they will survive a nuclear war are wrong. What we taught in the past about surviving a nuclear war is delusional! Developing nuclear weapons has only increased the danger of nuclear war as this technology spreads around the world. The only people who can benefit is the industry itself. Our only choice is like the abortion choice, life or death.
Thanks from right to left
Athena is online now  
Old February 5th, 2018, 09:28 AM   #38
end capitalism now
 
right to left's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,041
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbrother View Post
Just suppose the american people elected a very passive president......lets just suppose the n. Korea leader launched a nuclear missile.....and lets just suppose the president did not have grit to give the word to fire back, what do think would happen?
You are being taught to fear.....
Isn't it supposed to be up to God to wage violence on enemies after Jesus introduced a new covenant?

That aside, consider the sheer idiocy of what you're contending here from your rightwing(and liberalwing today) propaganda that North Korea is nothing more than a threat that must be eliminated.

A simple role-reversal exercise might make you consider that every nation targeted by the American Empire for destruction or regime change etc., feels they need to have a deterence that makes the cost of American invasion greater than any benefits to be won.

The scary thing is that Washington has no real opposition anymore! Everyone in media or in the White House or Congress is in the tank with the generals and the weaponsmakers that are just itching for a chance to use so called "limited" nuclear warheads in a "bloody nose strike" against North Korea.

The brave and righteous thing to do would be to recognize North Korea's needs for freedom from foreign invasion and end the fucking Korean War to start with! Since there has only been a "cessation of hostilities" since 1953, with no guarantees that hostilities cannot be resumed at any time!
Thanks from Athena
right to left is offline  
Old February 5th, 2018, 09:34 AM   #39
end capitalism now
 
right to left's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,041
Quote:
Originally Posted by Athena View Post
Nuclear war is not acceptable and education is the only effective way to avoid a nuclear war. No matter where a nuclear bomb hits, there are global consequences and people around the world will die of starvation. We know this from experience.

We have one choice and only one choice. The choice is not your life but not theirs. The choice is life or death. Please, listen to a doctor's explanation of nuclear war.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ug-DJtvHFE0
These messages only seem to work on normal people! But I've been thinking for a long time now that we're ruled by psychopaths! Psychopaths have variations in their intelligence and levels of self-control, but these are not people who are forward thinking by nature, regardless of how book-smart they are! They roll the dice in business, politics, military or the crime world with little or no thought given to consequences of their actions. The Washington pundits who called the generals like "Mad Dog" Mattis the "adults in the room" are either delusional or psychopaths themselves.
right to left is offline  
Old February 5th, 2018, 09:48 AM   #40
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: NM
Posts: 1,450
A couple of notes

Quote:
Originally Posted by right to left View Post
...

The scary thing is that Washington has no real opposition anymore! Everyone in media or in the White House or Congress is in the tank with the generals and the weaponsmakers that are just itching for a chance to use so called "limited" nuclear warheads in a "bloody nose strike" against North Korea.

...
The old MAD doctrine name for those weapons was tactical nuclear weapons. The hope was that the name would help channel a Soviet or Warsaw Pact reaction, if it ever came to that. But the Soviets never accepted the idea of a limited nuclear escalation.

I haven't seen anything - not even speculation - about a limited strike on N. Korea, nuclear or not. & of course, any nuclear strike on N. Korea would have fallout for South Korea, our ally, & possibly Japan (another ally) & likely China - a major US trading partner & holding a considerable amount of US debt. N. Korea credibly argues that they would fire all their arty @ S. Korea (just across the border), & invade & fire their missiles & etc. if attacked. They might salvo their nuclear weapons @ the US - or Japan or S. Korea, just to prove whatever it is they're trying to prove.

First use of even a tactical nuclear weapon on N. Korea by the US is very likely unacceptable to the World @ large. US doctrine was against that first use, when the Cold War was still on.
hoosier88 is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Politicians

Tags
nuclear, trump, war



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Iran nuclear: Trump extends Obama's 'worst deal ever' RNG Current Events 4 May 18th, 2017 05:53 PM
In Call With Putin, Trump Denounced Obama-Era Nuclear Arms Treaty RNG Americas 0 February 9th, 2017 03:39 PM
n nuclear threat REDUCED to safest level following Donald Trump vic Sabcat Current Events 4 November 17th, 2016 09:07 PM
Defcon nuclear threat REDUCED to safest level following Donald Trump victory excalibur Current Events 1 November 15th, 2016 01:16 PM
Putin ally tells Americans: Vote Trump or face nuclear war imaginethat Current Events 78 October 14th, 2016 11:55 AM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.