http://commonsensewonder.com/?p=379
read the article
2006-07-21 09:40:48 · 14 answers · asked by I Keep It Real 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Nuclear supremacy is undoubtedly held by USA not because of numbers of warheads but because they have demonstrated a willingness to first strike.I doubt the Russians are in second place because other than Chechnya they seem to have lost interest in sustaining cold war political hostility towards anybody.The most obvious second place nuclear supremacists are now the Israelis.Their propoganda machine has been softening up first strike targets,Iran and Syria [previously Libya]for some time.Following the likely armageddon in middle east who will nuke the nukers ?.
2006-07-21 09:54:16 · answer #1 · answered by morasice17 3 · 7⤊ 2⤋
You guys forget what China has been up to, they detonated their first Nuclear bomb in the 1960's.... almost 50 years later they have had a lot of time to put together a good arsenal.
They won't rival us for at least the next 30 years in technology, maybe not even by then but they are something we will have to worry about soon.
2006-07-21 10:51:59 · answer #2 · answered by WantToGoHome 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i think there are something in the world like 'power' that hides in it deep meanings: i mean legends and myths (created) sometimes determines the agenda. for instance: you may create an image that you can fight with many strong boys: you talk about your before fightings (true or not), your karate courses etc... people can not know if you can fight with a strong boy or not unless they see. but they begin to believe you if you create an effective image. and you do not have to prove this. like that you can not know what is legend and what is true...you create an image of usa or russia and believe it. reality is blurred sometimes especially for power issues. you can not know if usa has nuclear supremacy (or is just an image) unless you attack it.
2006-07-21 09:58:51 · answer #3 · answered by begum84 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hmmm...attempt battling against an IED or vehicle bomb. attempt it. I dare you, you little punk. Do you think of they stand a battling risk against random explosions in the line that they on no account observed coming? Do you not comprehend that it fairly is a grimy conflict? Do you think of terrorists have rules of Engagement? Why do not you have some appreciate for those squaddies available who danger their lives for little punks such as you. we ought to nuke the completed damn united states of america if we actually needed to. Is that 'superb' sufficient for you? as a results of fact final time I checked, Iraq did not have any nukes.
2016-11-02 11:57:35 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. Iraq does, but Saddam did such a good job in hiding them that no one (even him) will be able to find them. No, seriously, the U.S. Nuclear Arsenal is (by far) the largest one.
2006-07-21 09:47:27 · answer #5 · answered by camp1971 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It doesnt really matter how much N weapons you got once the MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) critical limit is reached. Beyond that point.....its just a statistic
2006-07-21 09:49:58 · answer #6 · answered by Zaphod B 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Doesn't matter if the US has nuclear supremancy or not- in an all nuclear war, everyone loses anyway.
2006-07-21 09:47:35 · answer #7 · answered by darth_timon 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
was there ever any doubt? during the cold war you had TWO nuclear superpowers, the u.s. and the soviet union, the soviet union is gone, and russia alone can not support the cost of such an arsenal.
2006-07-21 10:22:43 · answer #8 · answered by thirteen_fox 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That's right, So What????
2006-07-21 09:45:07 · answer #9 · answered by Vagabond5879 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't have to read it to know.
2006-07-21 09:44:01 · answer #10 · answered by Nelson_DeVon 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋