Latest Breaking News

Elmergantry

(884 posts)

59. well then lets

Reply to Javaman (Reply #50)

Wed Jul 20, 2016, 04:13 PM

Jul 2016

Rephrase:

Truman never stated that if he had to do it all over he would not have droppd the bomb.

Better?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

63 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Theresa May says she would kill '100,000 men, women and children' with a nuclear bomb [View all] jakeXT Jul 2016 OP

Same goes for every US President Martin Eden Jul 2016 #1

Question has no context... exactly, .... NotHardly Jul 2016 #11

Not "every nation-state leader on the planet" has control John Poet Jul 2016 #12

the problem is, what our leaders consider justification for military action is usually not yurbud Jul 2016 #30

The leader of any country you can think of Democat Jul 2016 #20

And some will do it on a pretext of lies and conspiracies. n/t ronnie624 Jul 2016 #27

Good God maryellen99 Jul 2016 #2

To be honest there are some scenarios where even I could see them having to use such a weapon cstanleytech Jul 2016 #4

there never any scenarios that they should be used... Javaman Jul 2016 #24

I wasnt thinking of a scenario for use in a war rather a worst case scenario cstanleytech Jul 2016 #31

and that's the irony... Javaman Jul 2016 #32

No its not. One single nuclear weapon does not have the capacity to cause such a winter cstanleytech Jul 2016 #33

Do you honesty believe that there would only be one bomb used? Javaman Jul 2016 #35

Again it all depends on the situation but we are speaking of a single city and a single bomb cstanleytech Jul 2016 #38

we are currently living in an Ice 9 situation with climate change. Javaman Jul 2016 #42

Not at all I am just pointing out that there are simply some albeit statistically unlikely cstanleytech Jul 2016 #43

this is were we will have to disagree. Javaman Jul 2016 #44

And a good day to you to. nt cstanleytech Jul 2016 #45

British female politicians don't screw around ansible Jul 2016 #9

Sure - but this is a descent into rogue state territory. forest444 Jul 2016 #10

No we don't. The US formal reserves the ability to not only use nuclear weapons but to use them as Statistical Jul 2016 #15

the use of nukes in any way shape of form is colossally stupid. Javaman Jul 2016 #25

THIS point is worth repeating ^^^^^^^^ uawchild Jul 2016 #54

They seem to think they have to prove they're tougher than the boys dflprincess Jul 2016 #14

She never read Orwell? cprise Jul 2016 #18

Message auto-removed Name removed Jul 2016 #51

The tricky part, I guess, uawchild Jul 2016 #3

It wouldn't be tricky at all for a decisive leader like Trump IronLionZion Jul 2016 #5

or because someone said he had small hands... sarae Jul 2016 #26

Post removed Post removed Jul 2016 #6

Truman would agree. NT Elmergantry Jul 2016 #7

Perhaps if he had the advantage of 70 years of hindsight he would not. nt dflprincess Jul 2016 #13

Unlikely IMHO Elmergantry Jul 2016 #21

so you are saying if Truman saw what we have now, 70 years of perspective and the cold war Javaman Jul 2016 #39

yes. Elmergantry Jul 2016 #46

Truman agreed to a 10 kiloton bomb of which he had no idea of its effects. nt Javaman Jul 2016 #37

afaik Elmergantry Jul 2016 #47

... Javaman Jul 2016 #48

regret Elmergantry Jul 2016 #49

you stated he had no regret. Javaman Jul 2016 #50

well then lets Elmergantry Jul 2016 #59

moving the goal post. very nice. Javaman Jul 2016 #60

i bet u are. Elmergantry Jul 2016 #61

slice and dice it any way you want. Javaman Jul 2016 #62

bu bye! Elmergantry Jul 2016 #63

My goodness!!!! Beacool Jul 2016 #8

Crazy talk locks Jul 2016 #16

Wow -- looking at the recording, I sure think she was much more strident than she should be. Akamai Jul 2016 #17

Put it in perspective - she can't publicly say no daveMN Jul 2016 #19

I hope Obama or Clinton would do the same, if they thought it was necessary. nt. Captain Stern Jul 2016 #22

just for grins... Javaman Jul 2016 #23

What's wrong with responding "It depends . . . . "? no_hypocrisy Jul 2016 #28

I have been studying the cold war and our nuclear arsenal for about 25 years... Javaman Jul 2016 #29

As long as other countries have them I dont see the US agreeing to do that sadly. cstanleytech Jul 2016 #34

of course not, because it's the old concept of the out dated adding machine. Javaman Jul 2016 #36

I dont look at it as being a money issue rather its a trust issue of none of the countries cstanleytech Jul 2016 #40

well of course, but the MIC need for funding outweighs even distrust of other nations. Javaman Jul 2016 #41

Your information is wrong sarisataka Jul 2016 #52

What's the big deal? A nuclear deterrent is no good if you imply you will never use it. Doodley Jul 2016 #53

It's been used TWICE. uawchild Jul 2016 #56

Why would you think I was being sarcastic? Doodley Jul 2016 #57

She shouldn't be in that job if she couldn't answer "yes"... Blue_Tires Jul 2016 #55

Exactly. The most dangerous thing is for one side to think they could win. Doodley Jul 2016 #58