100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: ISIS Could Obtain Nuclear Weapon From Pakistan! | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
With the rise of ISIS in west Asia, one is afraid to the extent that perhaps they might get access to a nuclear arsenal from states like Pakistan. ISIS recently said it could attempt to buy its first nuclear weapon within a year and that it might come from Pakistan. The Islamic state has billions of dollars in the bank, so they call on their wilayah (official) in Pakistan to purchase a nuclear device through weapons dealers with links to corrupt officials in the region
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pakistan's A.Q. Kahn is a notorious nuclear weapons proliferator.
But ISIL going nuclear would be suicidal. ISIL occupies the Buttfupistans of the globe; land the U.S. would not hesitate to nuke if preserving U.S. national sovereignty required it. And to give you an idea of just how lethal our nuclear triad (land based nuclear missiles, our B1 & B2 bombers, and our nuclear powered nuclear armed submarines) is, ONE Minute Man missile has more explosive power than all the explosives used in WWII by all sides; including the nukes we dropped on Japan. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
uche9aa
on
Tue 06/02/15 09:30 AM
|
|
Pakistan's A.Q. Kahn is a notorious nuclear weapons proliferator. But ISIL going nuclear would be suicidal. ISIL occupies the Buttfupistans of the globe; land the U.S. would not hesitate to nuke if preserving U.S. national sovereignty required it. And to give you an idea of just how lethal our nuclear triad (land based nuclear missiles, our B1 & B2 bombers, and our nuclear powered nuclear armed submarines) is, ONE Minute Man missile has more explosive power than all the explosives used in WWII by all sides; including the nukes we dropped on Japan. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dandy.
How? U.S. boots on the ground? You want ANOTHER U.S. ground war in the Middle East? Start dropping nukes now? The United States of America is the only nation to have used nuclear weapons in War. We get a pass on the WWII thing, because ... you know: - it was a World War, & - we were the only nation that had them. If we as indifferent to nuking diaper-heads as we were about nuking little yellow people; what do you think that will do to our standing in this globalizing world? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dandy. How? U.S. boots on the ground? You want ANOTHER U.S. ground war in the Middle East? Start dropping nukes now? The United States of America is the only nation to have used nuclear weapons in War. We get a pass on the WWII thing, because ... you know: - it was a World War, & - we were the only nation that had them. If we as indifferent to nuking diaper-heads as we were about nuking little yellow people; what do you think that will do to our standing in this globalizing world? The nukes were dropped on Japan to end the war and actually to save more lives had the war continued(which it would have). Not just being indifferent. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
unknown_romeo
on
Tue 06/02/15 10:11 AM
|
|
The nukes were dropped on Japan to end the war and actually to save more lives had the war continued Do you really believe that ? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The nukes were dropped on Japan to end the war and actually to save more lives had the war continued Do you really believe that ?
I do. Military strategists estimate that based upon the casualty rates suffered in the Pacific island battles as U.S. forces advanced on Japan, we'd have needed a minimum of 14 divisions to successfully conquer Japan. The losses in such a land war would surely have been staggering, And the total loss of human life might well have been less, by nuking Hiroshima, and Nagasaki. We'll never know for sure. But we do know beyond doubt: a) Japan attacked us at Pearl Harbor * b) We were not out of line in defending ourselves against the clearly fanatical Japanese. * "I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve." Japan's Commander Isoroku Yamamoto
BUT !! All that aside, it doesn't erase the fact that the U.S. is the only nation to have used nuclear weapons in War. We're already the planet's vigilante. Do we really want to slip down a notch, to be the globe's tyrant? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The nukes were dropped on Japan to end the war and actually to save more lives had the war continued Do you really believe that ?
Yes. "General Douglas MacArthur and other top military commanders favored continuing the conventional bombing of Japan already in effect and following up with a massive invasion, codenamed “Operation Downfall.” They advised President Truman that such an invasion would result in U.S. casualties of up to 1 million. In order to avoid such a high casualty rate, Truman decided–over the moral reservations of Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson, General Dwight Eisenhower and a number of the Manhattan Project scientists–to use the atomic bomb in the hopes of bringing the war to a quick end. The two bombings, which killed at least 129,000 people On August 15, just days after the bombing of Nagasaki Japan announced its surrender to the Allies." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
uche9aa
on
Tue 06/02/15 10:49 AM
|
|
Dandy. How? U.S. boots on the ground? You want ANOTHER U.S. ground war in the Middle East? Start dropping nukes now? The United States of America is the only nation to have used nuclear weapons in War. We get a pass on the WWII thing, because ... you know: - it was a World War, & - we were the only nation that had them. If we as indifferent to nuking diaper-heads as we were about nuking little yellow people; what do you think that will do to our standing in this globalizing world? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dandy. How? U.S. boots on the ground? You want ANOTHER U.S. ground war in the Middle East? Start dropping nukes now? The United States of America is the only nation to have used nuclear weapons in War. We get a pass on the WWII thing, because ... you know: - it was a World War, & - we were the only nation that had them. If we as indifferent to nuking diaper-heads as we were about nuking little yellow people; what do you think that will do to our standing in this globalizing world? ""lawlessly with those lawless savages who knows no law and doesnt obey any either" Does that include China's claim over the South China Sea? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dandy. How? U.S. boots on the ground? You want ANOTHER U.S. ground war in the Middle East? Start dropping nukes now? The United States of America is the only nation to have used nuclear weapons in War. We get a pass on the WWII thing, because ... you know: - it was a World War, & - we were the only nation that had them. If we as indifferent to nuking diaper-heads as we were about nuking little yellow people; what do you think that will do to our standing in this globalizing world? ""lawlessly with those lawless savages who knows no law and doesnt obey any either" Does that include China's claim over the South China Sea? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Does that include China's claim over the South China Sea?" a
There's at least a fragment of plausibility for China's territorial claims. ISIL has squat. There's not legitimizing standard in international law for recreational decapitation. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Drivinmenutz
on
Tue 06/02/15 12:05 PM
|
|
Pakistan's A.Q. Kahn is a notorious nuclear weapons proliferator. But ISIL going nuclear would be suicidal. ISIL occupies the Buttfupistans of the globe; land the U.S. would not hesitate to nuke if preserving U.S. national sovereignty required it. And to give you an idea of just how lethal our nuclear triad (land based nuclear missiles, our B1 & B2 bombers, and our nuclear powered nuclear armed submarines) is, ONE Minute Man missile has more explosive power than all the explosives used in WWII by all sides; including the nukes we dropped on Japan. "Pre-emptive" is not a term I would agree with. They already attacked Americans. What should have been done a long time ago is simple. The second ISIS took and killed an American hostage, we consider this an act of war. Let our troops go at them un-inhibited for a few weeks, by which time their numbers would be almost non-existent, then pack up and come home. Rinse and repeat, if needed. They would lose followers and Will very quickly as they would look like the sissies they are, and joining them would mean almost certain death. It would be a mistake to try and kill them all. It's an impossible feat that would lead to a never-ending conflict. But a quick, very hard/effective "slaughter" would send a message; "There are easier people to mess with than the U.S.". This is the only way ISIS can actually be dealt with. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dandy. How? U.S. boots on the ground? You want ANOTHER U.S. ground war in the Middle East? Start dropping nukes now? The United States of America is the only nation to have used nuclear weapons in War. We get a pass on the WWII thing, because ... you know: - it was a World War, & - we were the only nation that had them. If we as indifferent to nuking diaper-heads as we were about nuking little yellow people; what do you think that will do to our standing in this globalizing world? The nukes were dropped on Japan to end the war and actually to save more lives had the war continued(which it would have). Not just being indifferent. they had no idea how powerful it was, truman didn't know much about it when FDR died... they were amazed and scared at the damage they both did... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pakistan's A.Q. Kahn is a notorious nuclear weapons proliferator. But ISIL going nuclear would be suicidal. ISIL occupies the Buttfupistans of the globe; land the U.S. would not hesitate to nuke if preserving U.S. national sovereignty required it. And to give you an idea of just how lethal our nuclear triad (land based nuclear missiles, our B1 & B2 bombers, and our nuclear powered nuclear armed submarines) is, ONE Minute Man missile has more explosive power than all the explosives used in WWII by all sides; including the nukes we dropped on Japan. "Pre-emptive" is not a term I would agree with. They already attacked Americans. What should have been done a long time ago is simple. The second ISIS took and killed an American hostage, we consider this an act of war. Let our troops go at them un-inhibited for a few weeks, by which time their numbers would be almost non-existent, then pack up and come home. Rinse and repeat, if needed. They would lose followers and Will very quickly as they would look like the sissies they are, and joining them would mean almost certain death. It would be a mistake to try and kill them all. It's an impossible feat that would lead to a never-ending conflict. But a quick, very hard/effective "slaughter" would send a message; "There are easier people to mess with than the U.S.". This is the only way ISIS can actually be dealt with. i agree, either do it the right way, or don't bother with it... it seems that giving them(ISIS) weapons didn't work so well... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
With the rise of ISIS in west Asia, one is afraid to the extent that perhaps they might get access to a nuclear arsenal from states like Pakistan. ISIS recently said it could attempt to buy its first nuclear weapon within a year and that it might come from Pakistan. The Islamic state has billions of dollars in the bank, so they call on their wilayah (official) in Pakistan to purchase a nuclear device through weapons dealers with links to corrupt officials in the region Even though Pakistan is a major sponsor of terrorism I don't see them going along with ISIS or selling or giving them a nuclear device. Even the Taliban who Pakistan is closely allied with think's ISIS is way to extreme. Not to mention we have Pakistan's nuclear weapons under 24 hour observation and have teams trained to go in and take them from Pakistan if there is even a remote chance of that happening. We proved we can get in and out of Pakistan without incident verily easily and almost undetected. We also have Pakistan's main delivery system, the F-16's of the Pakistani Air Force under US watch at all times. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pakistan's A.Q. Kahn is a notorious nuclear weapons proliferator. But ISIL going nuclear would be suicidal. ISIL occupies the Buttfupistans of the globe; land the U.S. would not hesitate to nuke if preserving U.S. national sovereignty required it. And to give you an idea of just how lethal our nuclear triad (land based nuclear missiles, our B1 & B2 bombers, and our nuclear powered nuclear armed submarines) is, ONE Minute Man missile has more explosive power than all the explosives used in WWII by all sides; including the nukes we dropped on Japan. You think the US is the only country that would strike first? You don't think the UK, Israel, Russia and France wouldn't strike first? They are ALL targets of ISIS. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Lpdon
on
Tue 06/02/15 02:59 PM
|
|
Dandy. How? U.S. boots on the ground? You want ANOTHER U.S. ground war in the Middle East? Start dropping nukes now? The United States of America is the only nation to have used nuclear weapons in War. We get a pass on the WWII thing, because ... you know: - it was a World War, & - we were the only nation that had them. If we as indifferent to nuking diaper-heads as we were about nuking little yellow people; what do you think that will do to our standing in this globalizing world? A coordinated coalition could effectively go in and eradicate the problem. Boot's on the ground, planes in the sky, ships on the water etc. Obama is letting these a$$holes get stronger and stronger. It has now been found out that we aren't striking very many ISIS members at all during Airstrikes. The pilots have the terrorists in their crosshairs and it takes over an hour for them to get authorization to strike them or in some cases the planes have to return to base because they are low on fuel before a response is given. We could handle this problem very simply if we took action. Even Al Qaeda and the Taliban don't support ISIS. After we dropped that bomb we became the #1 superpower in the world that most of the countries in the world got behind. Sometimes we have to remind the world of our military might. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dandy. How? U.S. boots on the ground? You want ANOTHER U.S. ground war in the Middle East? Start dropping nukes now? The United States of America is the only nation to have used nuclear weapons in War. We get a pass on the WWII thing, because ... you know: - it was a World War, & - we were the only nation that had them. If we as indifferent to nuking diaper-heads as we were about nuking little yellow people; what do you think that will do to our standing in this globalizing world? The nukes were dropped on Japan to end the war and actually to save more lives had the war continued(which it would have). Not just being indifferent. Sounds good to me. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The nukes were dropped on Japan to end the war and actually to save more lives had the war continued Do you really believe that ?
Yes, it ended one of the worst and deadliest wars in the History of the world. |
|
|
|
|
