we should be mass-producing our specialty...instead we're slowly assembling a pathetic cache at best...a real arsenal would have warehouse after warehouse packed to every square foot so the roaches get claustrophobic...We know from Japan that 1 isn't always enough...and we know we need spares, lots and lots of spares...and some extras incase our spares dont work...i'm for the candidate who wants to make bombs faster than kit-kat bars...because it's like my dad always said..."a man aint a man unless he has plenty of nukes"...so do your part...for all of us...for our children...for their children...tell your congressman/woman to step up production...nuclear-life-saving-funbomb production...and when you see a child smile, you'll know it was all worth it. =)
2007-08-26 14:18:22 · 16 answers · asked by T-monster 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
I couldn't agree more!
I mean
If we go to war with China, how are we supposed to kill all of them anyway?
The answer has to be nukes!
.
2007-08-26 14:21:52 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Ok I think you were eating lead paint chips as a kid but I will do my best to answer your dumba$$ question. First of all, we dont need to mass produce anything since nuclear technology has greatly improved since WWII. There is no reason to stock hundreds of bombs when you only need a few to get the job done. We no longer have the conventional atom bomb like was used in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. We now have a vast array of technologies that can be implemented. I know that you are getting at some BS political crap, and I am wasting my time writing this, but for people that actually might want to know I have attached a link that talks about what we currently have in our arsenal.
2007-08-27 02:06:38 · answer #2 · answered by woodchipper890 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Uh... what? Have you ever heard of MIRVs?
From what I've read, the US has enough nuclear warheads to effectively neutralize every enemy city on the planet.
Sadly, your Dad doesn't seem to know much about nuclear winter. If we set off enough nuclear weapons, studies show that we will suffer roughly the same fate that befell the dinosaurs: tons and tons of dust will permeate the atmosphere and block out the sun, causing a massive climate shift that would kill us all. Not only that, but if you look at it from a purely strategic point of view, we have more than enough as it is: the detonation point of nuclear and thermonuclear weapons is radioactive for decades after the bomb actually goes off. Anywhere that a bomb hits is immediately rendered unlivable for at least another 50-60 years, which would make it exceedingly difficult to install a puppet government as too much of the population would be spread out in rural land, resulting in guerrilla warfare. And before you suggest that we cover every square inch of enemy soil in nuclear radiation, I might suggest that you instead try biological warfare, as it is far more effective at killing off a population while leaving the infrastructure intact.
As a general rule of thumb, the next time you feel like writing something like this, remember: there are lots and lots of people much, *much* smarter than you who make these kinds of decisions.
2007-08-26 21:39:35 · answer #3 · answered by Terras 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Okey, dokey! But, you will notice that most people on Y! OPPOSE war for any reason at any time. How are you going to convince all those people that we should prepare for what might be the final war?
I am old; I have read a lot of books, been a lot of places, got several college degrees, was in the Army for years and years. I know that most of the problems on earth today are caused by an over-population of human beings and that by reducing the human population by about 4.7 billion persons would be just about right, but most people want to make babies, not war, so what are you going to do? Me, I would much rather go out swiftly than by a long, lingering death to please the baby-makers!
2007-08-26 21:41:39 · answer #4 · answered by Nothingusefullearnedinschool 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
They are mass-producing nukes, the government just doesn't tell the people these things because there is many ppl from other countries. These ppl will tell other ppl in their country and soon it will be spread around the entire world.
The government didn't tell us that they created a way for our soldiers to become invisible untill they came out with that movie (sorry forgot name).
2007-08-26 21:23:43 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
We have over 1000 in storage, in other words more than enough to blow up the world many times over. We have far more than any other country and are probably the biggest threat to use them seeing as we take them away from everyone. We should think about containment, not production.
2007-08-26 21:23:37 · answer #6 · answered by D.Z. Carter 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
We actually have more than 120,000 nukes at the moment. That is enough to destroy the planet more than 2 times over. So, since we can already kill everyone at least once, why worry about making more?
2007-08-26 21:30:33 · answer #7 · answered by Omega_Red9 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Nuclear war means the end of the world. So you can forget about your children, grandchildren. We need to destroy most of our nukes so others can follow suit.
2007-08-26 21:23:29 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
First of all, do you have the clearance to really know this?
Secondly, MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) went out with the Soviet Union.
2007-08-26 21:21:12 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I propose a nuke for every child. A nuke for every blade of grass. A nuke for every breath of air in our atmosphere. M.A.D. is just a myth, it can't happen if we are the quickest to draw.
2007-08-26 21:23:51 · answer #10 · answered by Blast Man 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋