News: Check out Columbus Townhall's new bookstore: http://bookstore.columbustownhall.com/
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
May 22, 2012, 12:12:57 PM
*

Recent

Your Info

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
May 22, 2012, 12:12:57 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Statistics

Members
Stats
  • Total Posts: 40602
  • Total Topics: 5158
  • Online Today: 17
  • Online Ever: 252
  • (April 10, 2011, 07:49:21 AM)
Users Online
Users: 0
Guests: 14
Total: 14

Links

Pages: [1]
  Print  
Topic: Nuclear Weapons as a Preventative?  (Read 537 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
« on: January 19, 2008, 07:14:53 PM »
Vocal Observer Offline
Verified Member
CTH Associate Professor

*****
Reputation: +18/-0
Posts: 1971




Ignore

What are your views on this?

Quote
Russia Could Use Nuclear Weapons as Preventive Measure to Thwart Major Threat, Official Says

Saturday, January 19, 2008

MOSCOW —  Russia's military chief of staff said Saturday that Moscow could use nuclear weapons in preventive strikes in case of a major threat, the latest aggressive remarks from increasingly assertive Russian authorities.

"We have no plans to attack anyone, but we consider it necessary for all our partners in the world community to clearly understand ... that to defend the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Russia and its allies, military forces will be used, including preventively, including with the use of nuclear weapons," Gen. Yuri Baluyevsky said.

Continued...
Logged
The Principle of Subsidiarity
Repeal the 17th Amendment

"peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none." - Th. Jefferson

Oh yea... Run Paul Run!
« Reply #1 on: January 20, 2008, 01:20:04 AM »
MarcSchare Offline
Trusted Allies
CTH Lecturer

WWW
*
Reputation: +3/-0
Posts: 852




Ignore

That nuclear war is inevitable, whether it be Russia or some other country with some other dubious justification.

Our next President will be confronting a myriad of foreign policy considerations that none of us can imagine. That's why we need to give more thought to commander in chief than someone who can cry on demand or, in the case of Paul, someone who naively believes that if we just leave them alone, it'll be OK.



 
Logged
« Reply #2 on: January 20, 2008, 07:08:25 PM »
JohnO Offline
Verified Member
CTH Tutor

*****
Reputation: +0/-0
Posts: 259




Ignore

Yes, and that is why I want us to have an operational inventory of 10,000 nuclear warheads.  There has been some discussion lately of nuclear disarmament.  See the WSJ "Toward a Nuclear-Free World" Jan 15.  

To those august gentlemen I say, "I bless your innocence but do not condone your folly."  In a disarmed world, any state (or transnational group) that can creditably claims to have a few nukes is the world's instant dominant power.  American interests around the globe would be left enpris, and under certain circumstances, American cities could vanish.  If, on the other hand, the US has a scary massive nuclear weapons stockpile, and hopefully a marginally effective missile defense system the situation is very different.  To that we must add a publicly declared policy of massive retaliation.  If somebody sets off a nuke on US soil, we will briefly investigate to try to determine who, out of the crowd of usual suspects, was responsible, and then open the gates of hell.  If it is NoKo, rest assured we will turn the entire nation in radioactive slag.  If it a Muslim group, rest assured, we will destroy every hamlet from the Atlantic Ocean across North Africa and into the Kashmir.  If it is the PRC, we can reduce the world's population in a dramatic way.  Understand that even if some guys are willing to die for their cause, getting an entire society to go along with the gag is a whole lot tougher.  Even the most monolithic totalitarian states have a core group of decision makers, and not all of them will be willing to start down a path that leads directly to the annihilation of everything they have known.

And we will have plenty of nukes left over if anybody objects.
 
Logged
« Reply #3 on: January 20, 2008, 09:38:28 PM »
Counter Offline
Verified Member
CTH Associate Professor

*****
Reputation: +15/-1
Posts: 1673




Ignore

We have enough nuclear weapons.

Secure the southern border.

The Muslims are out-breeding the West. They don't need to fire a shot.

The U.S. is on the verge of bankruptcy with the unfunded entitlement mandates.

We try to compete in a global economy with an antiquated tax code.

I suggest we will default and become a second rate country with plenty of weapons stockpiled.

What is the solution?



 
Logged
Counter

No Coal. Know Cold.
Know coal. No cold.
 
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

TinyPortal v1.0 beta 4 © Bloc
Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines