they make it unlivable for us we do the same for them. being Iran wants Nukes we should give them one right where there trying to inrich urainiam.
2006-06-18 12:06:15
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
well certainly we have the capability to make the entire world uninhabitable but no one would ever want to do that. of course the idea would be to somehow be able to "win" a nuclear war. I think the excess comes from having multiple launch sites having the same targets as others so that if some of our launch sites were knocked out we could still launch to all of their targets from our remaining sites. you know what's really scarey with iran working to get nukes?. For the entire cold war we more or less counted on the "MAD" theory to prevent nuclear war. MAD an anacronym meaning Mutually Assured Destruction. Both the United States and the Soviet Union knew that if either attacked the other that neither could obtain a victory on a first strike enough to prevent the other from retaliating, thereby insuring that an exchange would result almost guaranteeing that both countries would face anhilation. Now with this nutcase in Iran who doesn't seem to be concerned about a nuclear holocaust. It's supposedly in the Quran that a messiah will come to them following a holocaust..and for them to start a nuclear war would just make it happen sooner. That's why we can't let them ever get them.
2006-06-18 21:59:52
·
answer #2
·
answered by RunningOnMT 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Someone gave ya bad information my friend. It'd take WAY more than 5 or 6. In the cold war, we built em in a "who's got the bigger penis" type of competition. In time, both U.S. and Russia realized that both had enough nukes to destroy the world several times over.
This is when they began maintenance, and replacement type programs for the arsenals. With the salt I and salt II treaties we both began decommissioning more and more weaponry. (both sides makin sure the other did'nt hold back, getting the "upper" hand)
I guess it's not well known, but today we no longer have U.S. land based ICBM's. You can actually BUY a decomissioned missile silo.
2006-06-24 17:21:05
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Good question. It used to be said that the bomb was good and ended WW2. Then the bomb was evil and could destroy all life on Earth. Yet, they continued nuclear testing all over the world, over a thousand tests in America alone.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_test
With all the irradiated war sites, nuclear medicine, test sites, and nuclear power plant accidents, the consensus by medical doctors and scientists is bomb bad.
So why do politicians still amass weapons of mass destruction, our arsenal being the largest, whine about others amassing womd, and promise to amass more?
Same reason they do all the other greedy, pandering things they do.
2006-06-18 19:55:41
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well, it would take more than '5 or 6' to blow away the earth.
Consider Mount St. Helens and how limited an effect it had when it blew.
2006-06-18 19:14:20
·
answer #5
·
answered by MikeGolf 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Nope, 5 or 6 won't do it. But I agree, we don't need the 12 or 13K nukes either. That is unless we plan to take out Mt Everest too along the way. lol ...
this insane world we live in.
2006-06-18 19:14:50
·
answer #6
·
answered by millertime 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
nothing better to do with tax payer money. lets fight an imaginary war or hostile takeover, build thousands of missles while children are starving to death and dying of desease.
2006-06-18 19:01:39
·
answer #7
·
answered by shannon d 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
are you stupid why would you want to kill yourself and its not going to solve anything the same way fighting isn't solving anything except for are freedom and peace be lucky you have a computer at home and a nice family most people don't have this opportunity to do what you might be able to do or even what i can do!! be glad for what you got you selfish little punk!
2006-06-18 19:02:43
·
answer #8
·
answered by Thomas B 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
cos thousands would get shot down in a nuclear war, we cant just shoot a nuke at a country, and hope they dont notice a giant bomb heading to them on their radar.
2006-06-18 19:13:24
·
answer #9
·
answered by lenstaa21 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
To feed the American ego. Why do you drive gas-guzzling 'buses', instead of economical meduim-sized cars, like the rest of us do?
It´s a matter of ego. But chickens ALWAYS come home to roost.
2006-06-18 19:08:35
·
answer #10
·
answered by Tokoloshimani 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
To blow up all in one place or if the first ones didn't work.
2006-06-18 19:00:46
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋