Which country will deploy nuclear warfare ?

[alpha85]

Which country do you think will be the first to use nuclear weapon. I appreciate the almighty US have already used TWO (may all the deceased rip), but they cannot count, i mean who will be the first one to use them in this era.

also any intellectual discussion would be interesting to hear too.

 

[DOA82]

*Pulls up comfy chair and watches*

 

[alpha85]

i say its between the US and Isreal, they seem to be losing this so called war on terror, i think its gonna be another hiroshima. lets face it America will sweet talk its way out of yet another 'big brother yet bullying' action

 

[squallumz]

god forbid anyone launches one of those fucking things. its a ridiculous and unnessesary weapon. i dont want to get into the politics, but fuck. nucelar weapons are complete bullshit.

 

[dave_rhino]

I agree squallumz, nuclear weapons are pussy because anyone can use them. Whats the point in having such great armys (eg. Britains ) if some fucker can wipe it out with one button?

Sorry, slightly off topic i know

 

[SOLDIER_officer]

Indo-Pak has the highest chance of going nuclear. The Norks aren't going nuke the South and Iran's nuclear program is "peaceful."

 

[Johan]

Don't forget France, we have the bomb too :thefinger

Anyway, I think Iran will use it asap :eek:

 

[alpha85]

I agree, it is an coward's tool and certainly an evil tool, as it clearly will killthousands if not millions of civilians if used....just look at horishima for instance. howeever, i think given the political arena one country is surey gona think they are god and launch one soon...even though i hate to admit such a scenario.

ps apologies to all the mods for the spammin (by accident) last week....wont happen again.

 

[dave_rhino]

Don't forget France, we have the bomb too :thefinger

you think France would ever be brave enough for something like that?

"We Surrender" ~ France

 

[Gordar]

None of the above, actually... I doubt anyone will use a nuke in the near future, as tensions aren't high enough to risk it.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Iran vs US has been going on for a while & I doubt it's any worse now than it was during the time Raegan & Khomeini (I probably spelled those names wrong...). No nukes were used then...

No nukes were ever used in the Israel - Iran conflict & it's not any worse now than it was under Khomeini's rule.

On a side note, Iran doesn't have the technology (yet).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

England has nukes, but it depends on the US when it comes to military actions (the last time they waged a war by themselves was against Argentina (the falklands war)), so the chances they'll ever use one is close to non existant (they will say that it's a fantastic, superb action when the US launches one, but that's an entirely different story)...

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

France has nukes, even tests them, but is not at war with anyone at the moment, so there's no need for them to use nukes...

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Israel has nukes, but doesn't need them. They have a powerful army and can use that when threatened by another country. The only enemy they face are terrorists who live amongst their own people and I really doubt they'll nuke their own just to get rid of some terrorists

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pakistan & India have been at eachother's throats for ages, but ever since both countries have nukes, relations actually seem to have been improving (slightly). Now they're actually talking with eachother. Besides, both countries know that if one uses nuclear weapons, they'll be nuked themselves.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Russia and China are currently not at war with anyone, except with people living 'within their own borders' (read Taiwan, Tibet, Chechenia). Nukes aren't going to help submit them.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What remains are North-Korea and the US. However, it's still not certain North-Korea has nukes and even though there's 100% certainty that the US has them, they have no enemies dangerous enough to warrant the use of nukes. The enemies that the US has cannot be nuked because they have no allegiance with the countries they're hiding in (& you can't just nuke some terrorists without harming the innocent people also living in the country) and are constantly on the move...

 

[SeeNowHuh]

I voted, but with a qualifier...
"Which country would be the first to deploy a nuke in this millenium ?"

There you have it, the difference between "will" and "would" !!

It's only an opinion, so be it !!

 

[E-Ann-Hilden]

None of the above....

 

[squallumz]

if someone lets one of those gay ass things go, the world will be done for. it would be a domino effect and that would be the end of the world as we know it. and how can anyone forget nagaski and hiroshima? my god, those poor people, the us could never ever replace the damage they caused by those ridicilous bombs!

no shit they signed for peace! half of their country got vaporized, fused together, or melted while others were dying of radiation posioning years after.

small bombs are bad enough but at least they were meant to damage small areas, generally weapons factorys, military bases, bridges, etc. at least they are usually used in a stratigic matter, but atomic weapons are meant for complete destruction of an unspeakable radius.

absoutley insane!

 

[SeeNowHuh]

Shit happens to ya' when in "World Domination" mode like Japan was at the time.
The nukes saved thousands upon thousand american soldiers lives as opposed to an invasion of mainland Japan.

Harry had to do it !!

 

[bigbadbrody]

North Korea was testing a nuclear bomb a while back, supposedly they were trying to reac the USA. I am not sure though:dunno:

 

[Legzman]

if someone lets one of those gay ass things go, the world will be done for. it would be a domino effect and that would be the end of the world as we know it. and how can anyone forget nagaski and hiroshima? my god, those poor people, the us could never ever replace the damage they caused by those ridicilous bombs!

no shit they signed for peace! half of their country got vaporized, fused together, or melted while others were dying of radiation posioning years after.

small bombs are bad enough but at least they were meant to damage small areas, generally weapons factorys, military bases, bridges, etc. at least they are usually used in a stratigic matter, but atomic weapons are meant for complete destruction of an unspeakable radius.

absoutley insane!

I couldn't agree more with this comment!
When the U.S. bombed Japan, in WWII, nukes were not as wide spread as they are today. We didn't have the crazy fuckin taliban to worry about, either! We bombed Japan, sad that it happened that way, yet in a way it may have been a good thing. It showed the world what unspeakable power and total devestation and destruction those things cause. The U.S. WILL NOT be the first to fire one off, but I promise if one is used against us, or any of our allies, i.e. israel...lord help us all...
What's to stop the president of Iran from using one himself, once the technology is perfected??? Not a god damn mother fuckin thing, that's what! Or if he don't use it, then what's to stop him from selling the technology or a weapon to a terrorist organization??? again...not a fuckin thing!
Someone had said tensions aren't high enough to use them yet. The situation between Israel and Hezbala was very, very close to boiling over and causing WWIII, which as we all know will be the war to end all wars...let me rephrase...the war to end all!
I'd be real surprised if any of us are around to see the turn of the century in 2100. Hell I'd be surprised if we even make it to 2050...

 

[member006]

I would hope that "all" know that it would effect everyone including their own country. Nobody can benefit, I want to think they are smart enough to know that and will act accordingly.

 

[USNinc]

I'll say that the US will be the firsat country....
I think the first nuke will be set off by a individual (terrorist) with no ties to any real country.

 

[DrMotorcity]

I agree, it is an coward's tool and certainly an evil tool, as it clearly will killthousands if not millions of civilians if used....just look at horishima for instance. howeever, i think given the political arena one country is surey gona think they are god and launch one soon...even though i hate to admit such a scenario.

ps apologies to all the mods for the spammin (by accident) last week....wont happen again.

You are greatly uninformed in your view of the useage of nuclear weapons in the Second World War, and quite possibly, you may not have ever been if such weapons had not been deployed.

Now here's someone who knows what they're talking about:

Shit happens to ya' when in "World Domination" mode like Japan was at the time.
The nukes saved thousands upon thousand american soldiers lives as opposed to an invasion of mainland Japan.

Harry had to do it !!

Yes, and all of us are far better off that he did.

 

[Elpajeroloco]

hahaha!!!! tipical...or is a evil north korean commi or a irani nut!!! hahaha typical...try to avoid hollywod crap and start to study history and politics...

ohh yeahh also the poor holy israel crap...

OMG..

actually is more probable that israel could use nukes in the next years in a desperate accion, after the fall of the SU, the open oil market from russia, the international oil market could left the mid-east , also increase the support to the oil producers, instead to israel (sinse israel dont have oil), its only time until saudi arabia put it eyes against israel -now is out of the bussisnes thanks to syria-, no SU, no reason of israel, quite simple