Also the Ukraine, for they used to be part of the soviet union, and they made most of the soviet's nukes. I suspect other countries that were eaten off of Russia have nuclear bombs too.
| |
I would much rather know what they actually have, rather than just be told what they have is capable of mass destruction. I wanna know HOW massive.
| |
I compleay agree! The media only covers the anti-war protesters (the minory). I rember the paper last week Schools across the island protest yadayadaya. Only One school protested. more then 80% of the schools are pro-war.
| |
The U.S. evidence in support for war is very weak. The only reason that war is even a debate in the U.N. right now is that the U.S. has the economy and "power" to pursue inefficient and wasted efforts for their own gain. No other country in the world today could be so stubborn, I don't believe.
-Dagolar | |
Siientx wrote:
What has this world come too? yeah it is dooms day, i dont really like bush, hes trying to be the toughest man in the world by having the most oil. He wants to rule the world, you watch as time goes you you ll find another hittler...(BUSH)..hope the world wins this fight when it happens thou. | |
SuperSaiyanGokuX wrote:
The world isn't any worse off now than it has ever been... i disagree, the human part isnt any worse but the world part is alot bad, the whole climat is changing, every thing is collapsing, i say in fifty or fourty years we wont have a blue sky, and id say we wont be able to see the sun, thats when we will be extinct. | |
I kind of like the htreads like this, you get to see who the informed members of the BYOND community are, and who are horribly mis-informed =)
| |
OneFishDown wrote:
I kind of like the htreads like this, you get to see who the informed members of the BYOND community are, and who are horribly mis-informed =) hmm yeah, id say im one of the mis informed :( but thats because im not even in america or us, im in a small small tiny tincy country called new zealand (the country where the americas cup is held now). | |
Kunark wrote:
Also the Ukraine, for they used to be part of the soviet union, and they made most of the soviet's nukes. I suspect other countries that were eaten off of Russia have nuclear bombs too. Ah yes, I forgot about the Ukraine. I knew Kazakhstan had divested itself of nuclear weapons, though. Lummox JR | |
Also of note: Canada, while not actually possessing any nuclear weapons, has the technology and skilled personnel necessary to construct them as needed.
| |
Hey I hand it to the New Zealanders. From what I understand, New Zealand is the one country that had an embargo placed on it because it would not allow the U.S. to move nuclear weapons into its territory back in the mid-20th century. New Zealand survived fine without the U.S., like Cuba, and I hand it to any country to tell the world's arrogant super power to take a hike.
-Dagolar | |
Spuzzum wrote:
Also of note: Canada, while not actually possessing any nuclear weapons, has the technology and skilled personnel necessary to construct them as needed. Like they'd ever use em' anyway ;). | |
50 years might be an exaggeration, but maybe not. Who knows. Nobody can tell. What bothers me the most is that your point has some warning to it, but we continue to consistently act with skepticism.
Global temperature has risen quite a bit over the last several decades, but hey, it might be natural, right? Icecaps are melting faster than any climatological report has ever spoken of. It's natural, we aren't responsible. It's going to take a crisis situation for people to finally figure it out,"Crap. I guess we have made a bit of a boo boo on the Earth. Well...time to clean up!" Lame... -Dagolar | |
Who said more than 80% of schools are pro-war? And why are they pro-war? Are they pro-war because they watch American CNN news? That's a good source for educated opinion generating....my god.
-Dagolar | |
Many countries have the capability of producing nuclear weapons. But why the hell bother? See, here in Canada, we've taken it upon ourselves to reduce our military expenditure to a whopping $800 million for the 2003-4 fiscal year. Their reason - money is being diverted to healthcare. That $800 million is going to the Canadian Armed Forces.
We have the capability, but not the "money". -Dagolar | |
Like they'd ever use em' anyway ;). Actually, I do have a very minor nagging feeling in the back of my skull that if Canada felt pressured, it would use a nuclear weapon. I have another very minor feeling that Canada does actually have a nuclear complement hidden away somewhere -- it's not something I would put beyond Chretien (who isn't much better than Houssein in my opinion). | |
The "threat" from Iraqi weapons of mass destruction is a propoganized statement to sway supporters. All I can say is, if anyone listens to both sides of the argument, listens to the news (in and out of your own country), looks up BOTH sides of the argument on the internet, sees the recently occurring events, I think the case for war is becoming increasingly unjustified, regardless of whether or not Suddam is actually a threat.
I have no dispute with anyone that the Iraqi leader is a monster and needs to be kept in check. I don't believe the U.S. performing a unilateral invasion of the country is a justified solution to the problem. -Dagolar | |
Oh please. Chretien and Hussein are two very different leaders. They have different ethics, run a different regime, and Chretien has done good and bad in Canada. He's not a murderous tyrannt, and he's going to retire peacefully. The two simply cannot be compared.
If you meant it as a joke, okay. ha ha. I get it. -Dagolar | |
So your saying, you think we should bomb our allies too? Lets figure out the war strategy:
"Axis of Evil II":
Russia
China
Iraq
Iran
Pakistan
N. Korea
S. Korea
Afganistan
France
Spain
Saudi Arabia
Canada
Mexico
Venezuela
Panima
India
Austrelia
Turkey
Kuwait
Jordan
Yeman
Cuba
Argentina
Austria
Chad
Chile
Columbia
Czech Republic
Egypt
Israel
Italy
Lebenon
Libya
Yugoslavia
Germany
VS
"Allies":
US
England
Japan
(And during middle of war, Japan and England surrender and join the "Axis of Evil II" for fear of getting a major butt-kicking.)
See a problem with bombing not only our enemies, but our semi-friends and friends too?
I say we just stick to Iraq, and try to negotiate with N. Korea.
I do want to see the monsterous Moab bomb going off in Baghdad.