zero nukes

[dannyday5821]

seriously... how plausable is this? just watched a clip for a "so called" documentary called "count down to zero" - im skeptical of it because, like global warming, its still a very debated topic, and if / when i get to watch it i expect it to be biased based on the trailer.

but at the end it bangs on about a wondeful world with zero nukes.

is that really ever likley? okay, lets pretend the good old west in its wisdom, wipes out all other rouge states who even utter the word plutonium... am i supposed to believe that the west is then just gonna go "right, fair play, now we can dispose our nukes" (dispose being an interesting concept in its own right :P)

as if! if it was me, id be like "well, maybe stockpile 50 just in case!" but i dont just see nukes as WMD's - i see them as political weapons as well. how powerful would a nation be if they were the "only" nation in the entire world to hold nukes...

when Obama says something like "...americas commitment to seek a world without nuclear weapons" - and every cheers like "omfg he's awsome" i cant help but think...

"do you really think we're that f**kin stupid"

[jake-the-peg]

I don't know what documentry this is but no it's pretty implausible because it's so easy to make a nuclear bomb.

The US built 3 or 4 with 1940s technology in a few years and they had to do a lot of the inventing!

The thing about nuclear weapons is it makes a state untouchable.

Look at all the Countries Western countries have invaded since WWII
Iraq
Afghanistan
Egypt
Vietnam
Korea

the list goes on and on - but you don't see them squaring up to North Korea.

A lot of countries see that and draw their own conclusions.

But when you look at "debate" on the internet you should look carefully to see who's doing the debating.

I doubt you'll find a single serious military comentator that thinks this is really possible.

You'll also not find a single serious research institution that thinks Human Global Warmings a myth.

The Internet gives everybody a voice - without regard to whether they know the first thing about a subject.

There's also a lot of debate out there as to whether or not you can run a car on water or whether crystals will cure your ails.

Just because there's "Debate" doesn't mean there's *informed
debate

[mibn2cweus]

The problem with weapons technology lies not so much with those who possess the intelligence to create it, the so called 'mad scientist', but with keeping it out of the hands of those whose intelligence is limited to the ability to push a button.

Unfortunately, there is an inexcusable disconnect between creative intelligence and the wisdom to keep products of the power of reason out of the reach of those who derive their own power second hand . . . minus the reason.

Creativity entails responsibility for how ones creations are ultimately used; no less so with regards to 'defensive' weaponry.