America did that in ww2,,to save lives,,,so?or just dance one on one with the metel gods
2007-10-13 09:39:19 · 29 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
America tested 7,000 nuclear devices,,the radiation is not a problem &oil is safe undergroung,,,put your special suits on and you can ride your horse right under the cloud,special mask on of-course,,ar-15,s in hand shooting wildly as the mushroms dissapates.PROBLEM SOLVED....
2007-10-13 09:47:16 · update #1
Iran isn't a threat to the US. Just because you want them to be to justify another war with your imagined enemy.
2007-10-13 09:44:40 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 10⤊ 5⤋
U NUTS?
Exactly how much do you know about nuclear testing? Hiroshima? Why and the what happened after?
The American tests in the So. Pacific? The French?
The consequences to the area & people.
First. Iran is in all reality a gorgeous booming nation. Top scientists come from there, I believe the guy in charge of NASA Mars Mission is one. They produce in the top 4 the Best Scientists in the World. Their country is spectacular. Y! Answers has people on here from Iran. Like it or not they are a viable, normally peaceful like people. Despite their political un rest. Google Tehran Times. Iran-Newspapers. Read up a bit about the "THEM".
Did you get to Wikipedia yet? Read about anything? OK it is a weekend.
The Japanese Emperor was hell bent on defeating the American's especially in the water. It was not working so well, and at times TOO well. SO American minds chose to try the bombs, fire blasts and so forth. We nearly wiped out the entire island of Japan. Heck, families, kids anything. Blind attacks, collateral damage.
SO, your proposal to just wipe out a nation we disagree with? although the President himself is hostile & sends arms out.... etc etc Just a blanket solution here?
Try add, the state of the Ozone is fragile. So let's just excellerate the process a few hundred years.
Try WW3 and say good bye to life as you know it.
The idea of STUDYING history is to learn from her mistakes. NOT repeat them. ( I agree, Vote hillary '08 and vote for war with Iran) Thank you very much.
PS The islands in SO PAC have never been the same after all these years. The fish are gone, kids sick and people keep dying? Over 40 + yrs later. AND the US did that too!
2007-10-13 09:57:55 · answer #2 · answered by Mele Kai 6 · 4⤊ 1⤋
We have evolved since then. Back in WWII this was just a really big bomb seemed like the natural thing to do. Now we know much more of the consequences and I believe all major countries wish it had never been discovered. No, Iran needs the world more than the world needs Iran. Eventually they will be blockaded and economically strangled into submission.
2007-10-13 09:49:28 · answer #3 · answered by rance42 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
no because this is a hypothetical
you can justify any act with a hypothetical
ex "If a single nuclear bomb mushrooming in London would save say 100,000 American lives would you Punch the ticket? "
or
"If a single nuclear bomb mushrooming in South Dakota would save say 10,000,000 American lives would you Punch the ticket? "
etc etc
you can justify any idiotic behavior with a hypothetical
2007-10-13 10:05:11 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The answer to your question is NO, I would not. You know very little about nuclear weapons and their effects if you believe the things you wrote. Nuf Sed.
By the way, in comparison, the bombs dropped in WWII were like a firecracker to 20,000 tons of TNT.
President Truman did the right thing then; it wouldn't be the right decision now with the weapons we have.
2007-10-13 09:50:13 · answer #5 · answered by James S 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Dropping the bomb anywhere would just start a chain reaction of others dropping the bomb and soon there would be only handful of survivors living under the earth like in the Planet of the Apes worshipping a stuid bomb. Then who'd take over?
2007-10-13 09:57:02 · answer #6 · answered by freekin 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
rather no longer in common terms their lives, yet additionally eastern lives. you spot via bringing an end to the conflict we prevented the want for a floor conflict in Japan which might have value much greater lives than the bomb did, additionally it stopped the eastern flow via Asia, saving countless lives in different Asian international places, additionally with Russia making plans an invasion of japan, it returned stored countless Russian lives. without the A bomb, that conflict could have raged on for 20 greater years, and value untold thousands and thousands upon million s of lives.
2016-12-14 16:51:44 · answer #7 · answered by barreda 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hell yes. If 100 Nuclear bombs had to hit Tehran to save 5 American life's, I would still punch that ticket.
2007-10-13 18:29:09 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
No and it didn't work in WWII. You should see an HBO doc. called White Light/Black Rain about Hiroshima & Nagasaki residents who survived the bomb and their descendents.
Many japanese lives were severely altered-biologically, physically & mentally. The bomb is not guaranteed to annihilate and I don't believe in killing ppl as a solution to any situation.
Forget the metal gods, they don't solve anything either.
2007-10-13 09:53:51 · answer #9 · answered by BklynNative 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Its against the rules of engagement, Im in Air Force Intel, I think its a good idea but the world does bcause of radiation poisoning, and after effects
2007-10-13 09:42:34 · answer #10 · answered by manyleapys 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No. A single Nuclear bomb mushrooming in Iran would end 100,000 or so Iranian lives, and we're talking a lot of innocent men, women, and children.
2007-10-13 09:42:51 · answer #11 · answered by M M 3 · 8⤊ 1⤋