If you had a nuclear weapon....

[GeauxLSU]

No that is not my position.

OK, then you would just never make that decision I guess. If so I don't blame you. I really wouldn't want to either. But I'm betting there are situations in the world, right now, where the net effect is lives saved.

 

[Aaron13B]

OK, then you would just never make that decision I guess. If so I don't blame you. I really wouldn't want to either. But I'm betting there are situations in the world, right now, where the net effect is lives saved.

There are almost 10,000 American troops in Afghanistan, almost 1000 stationed in Iraq. 5000 NATO troops, our allies are in Afghanistan alone. there are countless humanitarian assistance organization s operating in the middle east and thousands of American and foreign contractors assisting local and American forces. i couldn't sacrifice the lives of our deployed brothers and sisters or the lives of civilians for a "net effect". its easy just to say i'm going to drop a weapon on the middle east but we have no way of knowing what will happen after. I imagine there will be considerable economic, social, and political fallout.

 

[GeauxLSU]

There are almost 10,000 American troops in Afghanistan, almost 1000 stationed in Iraq. 5000 NATO troops, our allies are in Afghanistan alone. there are countless humanitarian assistance organization s operating in the middle east and thousands of American and foreign contractors assisting local and American forces. i couldn't sacrifice the lives of our deployed brothers and sisters or the lives of civilians for a "net effect". its easy just to say i'm going to drop a weapon on the middle east but we have no way of knowing what will happen after. I imagine there will be consider economic, social, and political fallout.

First, I haven't said what I would do. Secondly, who would drop a nuke when you have Americans deployed in the area? It's a hypothetical conversation about what, if any, use today, would be warranted and yield a positive result.

 

[Aaron13B]

i understand this is all hypothetical but the point I'm trying to make using a nuclear weapon doesn't seem reasonable in today's warzone.

 

[JamesG]

Perspective here. These are the people that the group you profit from would be dropping your nuke on:

Uh... no. The Plutonium would be de-enriched, mixed with other elements and turned into boring old fuel pellets that would enter the regular regulated power reactor fuel chain. No kablewy for you.

 

[Hayata]

Can you place it anywhere to make California fall into the Pacific?

I keed I keed!

 

[jmartinroe]

Perspective here. These are the people you'd be dropping your nuke on:

To get at a handful of dickheads...

Just saying.

 

[jmartinroe]

Put it on a barge in the middle of the Straights of Hormuz with a proximity switch. Shut down the Middle East until they get rid so ISIS and all extremist.Unfortunately you would need a bunch because some of they won't care and set it off. They want us back in the 5th century.

 

[JamesG]

You want to trade a wrong for a wrong? Sin for sin?

Do you know how many more thousands of those people we have killed or been responsible for the deaths of than all of the people that died on 9/11. That had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11.

Should someone be able to hold something (EMP?) over America because of what they don't like but that you have a tangential "responsibility" or connection too? Like... Miley Cyrus? How about the drug trade? US demand for drugs kills far more people than ISIS each year. Should the rest of the world insist that we stop buying drugs and threaten us, even though we have no way of actually doing it?

 

[Bucket99]

Canada...dropping mine on Canada. Problem Solved!