You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #46: And my argument goes further. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
closeupready Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-15-09 10:39 AM
Response to Reply #44
46. And my argument goes further.
As you say, you won't find any nuclear-armed power invading other nuclear-armed states.

And this is why it isn't only Iran who wants them, but other states that don't have them but are threatened routinely by other states. Also, those who have them but fewer, obviously would want to expand their arsenals.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
  -Do you believe nuclear weapons are vital to secure sovereignty? closeupready  Oct-15-09 08:56 AM   #0 
  - No, not necessary. The US cannot possibly disarm with all other nuclear countries doing the same.  sinkingfeeling   Oct-15-09 09:00 AM   #1 
  - Why not? They aren't necessary, you're arguing. We can guarantee our sovereignty without them, ya?  closeupready   Oct-15-09 09:04 AM   #4 
     - Sure we can guarantee our sovereignty but likely at a price we are unwilling to pay.  Statistical   Oct-15-09 09:16 AM   #11 
     - So if a nation like Russia keeps its arsenal intact, then NO nation is safe.  closeupready   Oct-15-09 09:18 AM   #15 
        - With a large enough arsenal .... yes.  Statistical   Oct-15-09 10:04 AM   #33 
     - We were certainly a sovereign country before the invention of nukes. I clearly stated that  sinkingfeeling   Oct-15-09 09:43 AM   #25 
        - So then no other country can rid itself of nukes without every other country doing the same, yes?  closeupready   Oct-15-09 09:47 AM   #28 
           - I see it extremely unlikely that any country that currently has nuclear weapons would disarm itself  sinkingfeeling   Oct-15-09 09:51 AM   #30 
  - To me, nukes make conventional warfare seem silly. So I don't get it.  imdjh   Oct-15-09 09:01 AM   #2 
  - well on that theory with some countries being literally insane  vadawg   Oct-15-09 09:02 AM   #3 
  - What about if your neighbor has either actually USED molotov cocktails, or criminally trespassed?  closeupready   Oct-15-09 09:06 AM   #6 
     - depends on the circumstances, if they used the molotov cocktails to end a bigger fight  vadawg   Oct-15-09 09:09 AM   #8 
        - Actually, yes, they are totally different, in that both cases, many people died; threats don't kill.  closeupready   Oct-15-09 09:16 AM   #12 
           - cool ill remember that line next time i help someone get a RO for a stalker  vadawg   Oct-15-09 09:36 AM   #24 
              - Dying is a fact. A threat is a potential fact.  closeupready   Oct-15-09 09:46 AM   #27 
                 - lol so threats dont matter then, lol ill remember that next time i am threatened with death  vadawg   Oct-15-09 09:51 AM   #29 
                    - You better get a pen and paper to write all this stuff down.  closeupready   Oct-15-09 09:56 AM   #32 
                       - nah ill just believe the guy who tells me he will kill me, its better to write that down  vadawg   Oct-15-09 10:07 AM   #34 
                          - Suit yourself. I understand - delusions can be so much nicer than reality.  closeupready   Oct-15-09 10:08 AM   #35 
                             - lol you really have no idea that there are bad people in the world who will keep their promise  vadawg   Oct-15-09 10:19 AM   #36 
                                - aa;lkfjiel; ksadml; fkaj; lakjuidfjal; jf; kljawo; ijfl; aj; eilfj.  closeupready   Oct-15-09 10:19 AM   #37 
                                   - dont be so hard on yourself, admitting your a dick is the first step towards recovery..  vadawg   Oct-15-09 10:21 AM   #38 
                                      - ;aioenvkl c l; feasl siojile oilc l;kje soi kcloijoj asfei  closeupready   Oct-15-09 10:25 AM   #40 
                                         - yes i know its hard, but its a process, but soon you will proudly be able to declare  vadawg   Oct-15-09 10:30 AM   #42 
                                            - Plonked. When you get some class, get back to me.  closeupready   Oct-15-09 10:36 AM   #43 
                                               - welcome back you are now upgraded to being an ass, well done  vadawg   Oct-15-09 10:37 AM   #45 
  - Any country who signed nuclear non-proliferation has made a promise/contract to not acquire them.  Statistical   Oct-15-09 09:05 AM   #5 
  - That is not an answer to my question. Are you afraid to answer it honestly?  closeupready   Oct-15-09 09:06 AM   #7 
     - Ok let me spell it out for you....  Statistical   Oct-15-09 09:10 AM   #9 
        - Are you going to say this in 30 years when the US dollar is no longer the reserve currency, and  closeupready   Oct-15-09 09:14 AM   #10 
           - Not sure what you are saying?  Statistical   Oct-15-09 09:17 AM   #14 
              - I'm saying that it's easy for the premier superpower to be magnanimous; when fortunes change, though  closeupready   Oct-15-09 09:20 AM   #16 
  - That we should even consider...  Nuclear Unicorn   Oct-15-09 09:17 AM   #13 
  - I believe that the US is in no position to ask others countries to disarm  La Lioness Priyanka   Oct-15-09 09:23 AM   #17 
  - Indignance? I completely agree with you.  closeupready   Oct-15-09 09:24 AM   #18 
     - Oh sorry, by YOU i meant universal You, not closeupready  La Lioness Priyanka   Oct-15-09 09:25 AM   #19 
  - The question is moot because the genie has left the bottle  slackmaster   Oct-15-09 09:26 AM   #20 
  - Yes, it is moot, but it is useful for discussion purposes.  closeupready   Oct-15-09 09:31 AM   #22 
  - Yes, they are vital.  kctim   Oct-15-09 09:31 AM   #21 
  - I think so, too.  closeupready   Oct-15-09 09:32 AM   #23 
  - Yes, I think we should hold on to the nukes we've got  rockymountaindem   Oct-15-09 09:46 AM   #26 
  - No. Yes. And what the hell are you all so afraid of? n/t  Greyhound   Oct-15-09 09:53 AM   #31 
  - Don't hear no one talking about bombing North Korea any more do we?  NNN0LHI   Oct-15-09 10:24 AM   #39 
  - It does work that way, even as we can all agree that the current NK regime is brutal and ugly.  closeupready   Oct-15-09 10:27 AM   #41 
  - Correct  Mendocino   Oct-15-09 10:36 AM   #44 
     - And my argument goes further.  closeupready   Oct-15-09 10:39 AM   #46 
  - Personally, I think nuclear weapons are a passing phase  Sinti   Oct-15-09 10:46 AM   #47 
     - this is an excellent post.  La Lioness Priyanka   Oct-15-09 11:51 AM   #48 
     - I also like this post, except that since I am pessimistic, I don't see good things in the future.  closeupready   Oct-15-09 12:27 PM   #49 
        - You've got to believe it's possible before you start looking for ways  Sinti   Oct-15-09 01:56 PM   #50 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC