We Do Not Need Weapons Of Mass Distruction

Why the hell does any country need a weapon that can mess up the whole world.I really see no positive reasoning behind the purpose of allowing these weapons to exist today.There are too many ignorant people running things in the world today,and they don't need to have these deadly weapons at hand.What real positive outcome is there after a nuclear war? NoN!!!!! This world was created,and prepared for us by a great force.Do we really need a man made,no mercy weapon,made to Kill not only us,but wound our only real life support In the Universe?

[Martin]

I think we all agree with ya here.

But please, use less punctuation next time when posting. I had to remove alot of your exclamation and question marks.

BTW, this new 'guest posting' feature is an experiement in the works. Not sure how much longer i'll keep it going.

[Big Red 11]

We keep stockpiles because the other guy keeps stockpiles. And people don't trust each other enough to agree for everyone to destroy their stockpiles. There will always be that one country that keeps their weapons and thus rules the rest.

[Martin]

Originally Posted by Big Red 11

We keep stockpiles because the other guy keeps stockpiles. And people don't trust each other enough to agree for everyone to destroy their stockpiles. There will always be that one country that keeps their weapons and thus rules the rest.

Its just a big "power" thing. Countries feel like their the ultimate power and cant be messed with if they have nukes. Now we have to think twice about attacking North Korea since they have the nukes and tested them successfully.

If we dont act soon, Iran will be added to the "no-touch" list.

[RadioactiveMan]

I hate nukes too. I would like nothing better than to see them all destroyed. However, that's not possible. Nothing can prevent a tyrant from acquiring nukes and nothing can stop someone from using them except the threat of nuclear retaliation.

So long as everyone has them, nobody should use them. Of course someone could use one and set the whole world on fire, but that risk is worth it. The alternative is nuclear disarmament and then everyone gets caught with their pants down.

[Jess1983]

I just feel the time is now to really start looking at ways of making this world a more suitable place for people to live without fear of mass destruction based on the ignorance of the ones who call themselves World Leaders.We seem only as if we're being lead deeper,and deeper into some kind of big black hole.People are losing hope for a brighter day,and are just begining to accept the worst everyday.

Russki's tryin' to start another Cold War now that we helped them out of all that Soviet debt...

Missiles could reach Europe if Kremlin wanted: general
Mon Feb 19, 2007 - Russia's military is capable of firing missiles at Poland and the Czech Republic if they agreed to host a U.S. missile shield, Russia's Strategic Forces commander said, but added it was for the Kremlin to decide.

President Vladimir Putin has described Washington's plans to deploy elements of its Missile Defense System in the two central European states as a threat to Russia's national security which would damage the strategic balance of forces on the continent. "So far we have seen nothing being done, only intentions being talked about," General Nikolai Solovtsov told a news conference on Monday.

"But should the Polish and Czech governments decide (to host the U.S. missile shield), the strategic missile forces will be capable of having these installations as their targets if a relevant political decision were made," he added. NATO spokesman James Appathurai, responding to the general's comments, said in a statement: "The days of talk of targeting NATO territory or vice versa are long past us. This kind of extreme language is out of date and uncalled for."

In early 1990s, post-Soviet Russia announced its missiles were no longer targeted at NATO countries. Analysts said then the announcement, which could not be independently verified, was a purely symbolic gesture ending the Cold War hostility.

MORE

See also:

Granny says, "Miss Condi givin' `em what-for, you go girl!...

Rice Slams Russian General Over Warning
Feb. 21, 2007 - General Says Czech Republic And Poland Could Be Targeted If They Allow U.S. Missile Defenses

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice called a Russian general's threat that Poland and the Czech Republic could be targeted if they allow U.S. missile defense installations, "extremely unfortunate." Rice says the plan poses no threat to Russia. Gen. Nikolai Solovtsov, head of Russia's strategic missile forces, said Monday that Russia might train its missiles on the two countries if they accept a U.S. proposal to base 10 interceptor missiles in Poland and a radar in the Czech Republic.

"I think that was an extremely unfortunate comment," Rice said at a news conference in Berlin, adding that the system did not threaten Moscow's forces "and we have had the opportunity to explain that to Russia."
She said the United States has made clear to Russia that the system would be to counter any missile threat from Iran. The system is too small to stop Russia's large nuclear arsenal, she said.

"Anyone who knows anything about this knows that there is no way that 10 interceptors ... are a threat to Russia or that they are somehow going to diminish Russia's deterrent of thousands of warheads," Rice said. "I think everyone understands that with a growing Iranian missile threat, which is quite pronounced, that there need to be ways to deal with that problem," she added.

MORE

[waltky]

A nuclear arms 'domino effect' in the Middle East...

An Islamic nuclear arms race?
23 August 2007 - Despite years of negotiations and US sanctions, successive reformist and hardline Iranian governments continue to develop the domestic capacity to manufacture nuclear fuel through uranium enrichment, which can also be used to produce nuclear weapons.

Iran's nuclear programme, combined with President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's bellicose rhetoric and the increasing influence of Tehran-affiliated Shia groups in Iraq, Lebanon and other Middle Eastern countries, has alarmed Sunni Arab regimes. Iranian officials insist their decades-long nuclear programme has entirely peaceful aims. They claim they need nuclear energy to provide additional civilian energy supplies in preparation for the day when their oil supplies become exhausted.

Yet, foreign governments, including those in the Arab Middle East, suspect other considerations are also motivating the Iranian government to develop its own nuclear enrichment capacities. Having such a capacity could underscore Iran's claims to great power status, provide resources to benefit domestic political factions or, most worryingly, give Tehran the option to develop nuclear weapons more rapidly should Iranian leaders decide that circumstances warranted such a step.

One response of these regimes has been to purchase additional conventional weapons from Russia, the US and other countries. Another has been to announce that they are considering launching their own nuclear initiatives. Although these governments formally deny that Iranian actions have induced their nuclear declarations, the near-simultaneous decision of so many Sunni Arab regimes to proclaim interest in pursuing some kind of nuclear energy programme raises the possibility of a nuclear arms race among the Islamic countries of the Middle East.

In September 2006, Egypt became the first Sunni Arab regime in recent years to declare interest in developing a civilian nuclear power programme. President Hosni Mubarak and other Egyptian officials announced they would restart their country's programme, which has been in abeyance for two decades following the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster. Egypt faces growing water and electricity shortages, in part due to a soaring youth population, which a civilian nuclear programme could alleviate.

Egypt currently possesses small nuclear research reactors, but is considering constructing at least one large power-producing plant. For example, one option being considered is inviting foreign companies to build a 1,000-megawatt plant at Al-Dabaa on the Mediterranean coast that would begin operating in 2015. Egyptian policy makers have discussed civil nuclear co-operation with the governments of Canada, China, Russia and the US.

An Islamic nuclear arms race? - Jane's Security News

[waltky]

Bunker-Buster Bombs -- Is Iran Next?
Oct. 24, 2007: Bomb Iran? U.S. Requests Bunker-Buster Bombs; White House Bomber Request Leaves Some Wondering if U.S. Is Preparing Action in Iran

Tucked inside the White House's $196 billion emergency funding request for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is an item that has some people wondering whether the administration is preparing for military action against Iran. The item: $88 million to modify B-2 stealth bombers so they can carry a newly developed 30,000-pound bomb called the massive ordnance penetrator, or, in military-speak, the MOP.

The MOP is the the military's largest conventional bomb, a super "bunker-buster" capable of destroying hardened targets deep underground. The one-line explanation for the request said it is in response to "an urgent operational need from theater commanders." What urgent need? The Pentagon referred questions on this to Central Command. ABC News called CENTCOM to ask what the "urgent operational need" is. CENTCOM spokesman Maj. Todd White said he would look into it, but, so far, no answer.

There doesn't appear to be any potential targets for a bomb like that in Iraq. It could potentially be used on Taliban or al Qaeda hideouts in the caves along the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan, but there would be no need to use a stealth bomber there. So where would the military use a stealth bomber armed with a 30,000-pound bomb like this? Defense analysts say the most likely target for this bomb would be Iran's flagship nuclear facility in Natanz, which is both heavily fortified and deeply buried.

MORE

[waltky]

Putin gettin' sassy after we help their economy recover...

Putin re-starts cold war fears
Friday 30th November, 2007 - Russian President Vladimir Putin has officially suspended Russia’s Cold War treaty which limits military forces in Europe.

He has signed into law the suspension of Russia’s adherence to the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty (CFE). Deteriorating relationships between Russia and NATO countries had led to Mr Putin accusing the West of trying to weaken Russia.

Senior Russian Defence Ministry officials say the suspension will not trigger any immediate redeployment of Russian forces on its western flank, but it may happen in the future.

First deputy speaker Lyubov Sliska has said other international treaties could be re-examined by a new parliament which comes into power on Sunday. The new parliament is set to be dominated by Vladimir Putin's United Russia party.

Putin re-starts cold war fears