Nuclear Terrorism

[Aegon Spengler]

http://time.com/39131/barack-obama-nuke-manhattan-new-york/

People have used the threat of nuclear terrorism in order to justify policies and laws like the national defence authorization act, the patriot act, etc.

And in a perverse way - doesn't protecting ourselves from nuclear terrorism help prevent us from losing even more civil rights? if an atomic bomb went off in NY, that's the END of civil liberty as we know it today.

Experts have recently estimated the probability of such an attack in the near future at between 30% and 50%. That number might’ve been too high to begin with, and may be even more so now thanks to recent advances in nuclear security.

The american government seems quite willing to dwindle freedoms in order to keep America protected from nuclear weapons.

Does this change anyone's perspective on the patriot act or the NDAA?

 

[7437]

That is pretty sensationalist and fear mongering.

 

[BareKnucklez**]

USA is the country thats been in the most wars. They're the only ones to actually use nuclear weapons. Any other country acquiring nuclear arms is only to protect the world from USA.

 

[billo2007**]

USA is the country thats been in the most wars. They're the only ones to actually use nuclear weapons. Any other country acquiring nuclear arms is only to protect the world from USA.

this is ludicrous and if you believe that god help you.

How come we in UK have no issues with them ever?

Only a fool would say US did not go after some oil in some way or another i.e. Iraq etc.
You have to give them the benefit of the doubt.
Any country they have been in there are Tyrans in charge commiting war crimes like it or not.

I for one as UK Cit have a level of faith in US and yes global police are neccesary. The only countrys using nukes ffs, wtf do u think SK or Russia would do if USA are not around?

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

Yeah, the US is an aggressive dangerous power. This is why their neighbors always spend so much at on their militaries.

 

[BareKnucklez**]

this is ludicrous and if you believe that god help you.

How come we in UK have no issues with them ever?

Only a fool would say US did not go after some oil in some way or another i.e. Iraq etc.
You have to give them the benefit of the doubt.
Any country they have been in there are Tyrans in charge commiting war crimes like it or not.

I for one as UK Cit have a level of faith in US and yes global police are neccesary. The only countrys using nukes ffs, wtf do u think SK or Russia would do if USA are not around?

You say they definitely went after oil but we must give them the benefit of the doubt lol? So bombing thousands of poor people isn't a war crime if you're the USA?
You have no problems because the UK are allies with USA. I think you're led astray by USA's propaganda. Yes they use propaganda just as Russia and NK (I assume you meant North Korea? But SK do too.) Global police are necessary, but America's history has shown they should not be responsible. Besides, USA's interfering in other countries will only provoke more terrorist attacks on innocent US civilians.
I think you need to look at the matter from a neutral viewpoint, I'm not anti-USA but I am anti-war, especially when it involves USA.

 

[BareKnucklez**]

Yeah, the US is an aggressive dangerous power. This is why their neighbors always spend so much at on their militaries.

It seems that way when you look at how many wars they're involved in and how many people they've murdered. USA's neighbours, Canada and Mexico are their allies, they have no need to fear USA. Countries in the Middle East certainly do.

 

[billo2007**]

You say they definitely went after oil but we must give them the benefit of the doubt lol? So bombing thousands of poor people isn't a war crime if you're the USA?
You have no problems because the UK are allies with USA. I think you're led astray by USA's propaganda. Yes they use propaganda just as Russia and NK (I assume you meant North Korea? But SK do too.) Global police are necessary, but America's history has shown they should not be responsible. Besides, USA's interfering in other countries will only provoke more terrorist attacks on innocent US civilians.
I think you need to look at the matter from a neutral viewpoint, I'm not anti-USA but I am anti-war, especially when it involves USA.

I am anti war actually.

I did not say they did go in for oil or did not. I said basically nobody knows so dont make assumptions either way pls. speculation is lame. facts are king.

no im not misled by propoganda. The US happen to invade a load of war torn countries im acknowledging the fact they may be trying to help people.

If they are such monsters would being allies save you? the UK have not always been allies of US mate. over stretching it.

Civil and modern countries have no issues with US. fact or fiction?

Im actually sick and fucking tired of the Anti US propoganda BS everywhere. Facts are king.

lolz @ all the good civilized countries behaving in proper fashion being allies. come on man.....

 

[oldshadow]

USA is the country thats been in the most wars. They're the only ones to actually use nuclear weapons. Any other country acquiring nuclear arms is only to protect the world from USA.

You know that statement is bullshit.

 

[billo2007**]

Seriously this should be in the fucking wasteland. this is ridiculous shit.

OP no problem with you. This topic is fucking dumb as hell man.

 

[5H3RD0G]

That seems to be the negotiating tool. Once you create it shall defeat you. Now you have to undo what you have created a monster. :icon_chee Think before you act people, good advice for future challenges. North Korea has mastered the technique always seeking the spotlight and the US always obliging by "accidentally" circling around the borders. If you circle don't be seen or else.

 

[BareKnucklez**]

You know that statement is bullshit.

Absolutely not. The only part that isn't factual is my opinion in the last line, and its not fictional either. USA needs to be much more careful about their foreign policy in the future.

 

[oldshadow]

Absolutely not. The only part that isn't factual is my opinion in the last line, and its not fictional either. USA needs to be much more careful about their foreign policy in the future.

First statement was not correct.

it's nearly impossible to figure out which country has fought in the most wars, and even if it is Britain/England, it's not by much

Britain/England 109 wars

US about 77 wars

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Which_country_has_been_involved_in_the_most_wars



As you stated the second is opinion and excludes the nuclear countries that are “friends” of the US.

http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/Nuclearweaponswhohaswhat



PS: and I agree that we should not be the world police and stay out of most shit.

 

[Scrody]

It seems that way when you look at how many wars they're involved in and how many people they've murdered. USA's neighbours, Canada and Mexico are their allies, they have no need to fear USA. Countries in the Middle East certainly do.

Funny how America doesn't go after neighboring countries, yet China and Russia do, and not a peep of criticism from you.
You're also hilariously wrong about the US being in the most wars.

 

[Aegon Spengler]

First statement was not correct.



http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Which_country_has_been_involved_in_the_most_wars



As you stated the second is opinion and excludes the nuclear countries that are “friends” of the US.

http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/Nuclearweaponswhohaswhat



PS: and I agree that we should not be the world police and stay out of most shit.

Most people believe that and I tend to agree, but what if a nuclear weapon went off in Los Angeles? Or Houston? When the trade centers went down, many americans saw Iraq as enough of a threat that they re-elected George Bush after he sent the American army at them, knowing they had nothing to do with 9/11 and the WMD were not real or ever found.

What would happen and how would you feel after a nuclear blast?

 

[avenue94]

This whole discussion is silly. The chance of a nuclear power or terrorists using an actual nuclear weapon is remote. The former will not use them for fear of retaliation. The latter will not for a whole list of reasons. First, no country will ever try to sneak a nuclear weapon to terrorists. That would be the equivalent of handing off tens of billions of dollars. The other reason is there is no point to handing off a nuke to a third party because there is no way you will be able to hide it (at worst, you have literally a 25 percent chance of guessing the original nation by pure luck). Sneaking around weapons that weigh thousands of pounds is hardly practical either and the people exaggerate the ease of creating nuclear weapons. If the know how was as common or process as easy as they claim, far more parties would have nukes.

 

[oldshadow]

Most people believe that and I tend to agree, but what if a nuclear weapon went off in Los Angeles? Or Houston? When the trade centers went down, many americans saw Iraq as enough of a threat that they re-elected George Bush after he sent the American army at them, knowing they had nothing to do with 9/11 and the WMD were not real or ever found.

What would happen and how would you feel after a nuclear blast?

If we or our allies are attacked I have no problem going after the attackers by with what ever force required.

 

[OldGoat]

http://time.com/39131/barack-obama-nuke-manhattan-new-york/

People have used the threat of nuclear terrorism in order to justify policies and laws like the national defence authorization act, the patriot act, etc.

And in a perverse way - doesn't protecting ourselves from nuclear terrorism help prevent us from losing even more civil rights? if an atomic bomb went off in NY, that's the END of civil liberty as we know it today.



The american government seems quite willing to dwindle freedoms in order to keep America protected from nuclear weapons.

Does this change anyone's perspective on the patriot act or the NDAA?

Interesting question. The stakes are high with nuclear or biological weapons. The stakes are high with too much government power. Intelligence and military action can mitigate a terrorist attack with WMD. Proper, serious, and robust oversight on government action can mitigate abuse of government power. I don't have faith in the government oversight because I don't have faith in the average American voter's decision making.

 

[AgentOrange24]

USA is the country thats been in the most wars. They're the only ones to actually use nuclear weapons. Any other country acquiring nuclear arms is only to protect the world from USA.

Bold, but effective.

This is trolling I can get behind.

 

[AgentOrange24]

Most people believe that and I tend to agree, but what if a nuclear weapon went off in Los Angeles? Or Houston? When the trade centers went down, many americans saw Iraq as enough of a threat that they re-elected George Bush after he sent the American army at them, knowing they had nothing to do with 9/11 and the WMD were not real or ever found.

What would happen and how would you feel after a nuclear blast?

Given where the attack would likely come from, most American's would be in favor of just turning the entire Middle East into a pile of glass.