Webbo Posted 6 January 2016 Share Posted 6 January 2016 I remember the cold war, I was a kid throughout and I can't ever remember having sleepless nights about the threat of nuclear war. The people who are concerned about what's happening in certain areas of the aren't necessarily fearing the end of the world, just don't like what they see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 6 January 2016 Share Posted 6 January 2016 I remember the cold war, I was a kid throughout and I can't ever remember having sleepless nights about the threat of nuclear war. The people who are concerned about what's happening in certain areas of the aren't necessarily fearing the end of the world, just don't like what they see. No disagreement there either. I just take issue with those who like to make the threat appear bigger than it actually is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 6 January 2016 Share Posted 6 January 2016 Well theyre obviously batshit crazy but can you really blame them for wanting a bomb when you see what's happened to other small, anti-NATO countries? Not at all, the only country to remove nuclear weapons from it's shores in the recent past is the Ukraine and look what happened to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rincewind Posted 6 January 2016 Share Posted 6 January 2016 If you want to see a film about the cold war Webbo try Bridge of Spies. Cloak and dagger stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 6 January 2016 Share Posted 6 January 2016 If you want to see a film about the cold war Webbo try Bridge of Spies. Cloak and dagger stuff. I reviewed it yesterday Ken. You quoted it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stadt Posted 6 January 2016 Share Posted 6 January 2016 Textbook rincey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bovril Posted 6 January 2016 Author Share Posted 6 January 2016 Heavy lols Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danny. Posted 6 January 2016 Share Posted 6 January 2016 Not at all, the only country to remove nuclear weapons from it's shores in the recent past is the Ukraine and look what happened to them. Countries like Spain, Portugal and Greece are also being nuked daily as they have no defence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 6 January 2016 Share Posted 6 January 2016 Countries like Spain, Portugal and Greece are also being nuked daily as they have no defence. Ukraine haven't been nuked either. Spain Portugal or Greece don't have a border with Russia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaspa Posted 6 January 2016 Share Posted 6 January 2016 Spain, Portugal and Greece are all with NATO too, it gets very technical at that level though. I suppose in a perfect world there would be no nukes and everything would be rosy but they're definitely more than pawns on the board and carry some weight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merging Cultures Posted 6 January 2016 Share Posted 6 January 2016 We need a 'Leicesmac Potential Apocalypse Thread'.I think I started a prepper thread a while ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 6 January 2016 Share Posted 6 January 2016 I reviewed it yesterday Ken. You quoted it. Countries like Spain, Portugal and Greece are also being nuked daily as they have no defence. Bit of a different situation, for a start they are all under the NATO banner and as pointed out don't share a border with Russia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danny. Posted 6 January 2016 Share Posted 6 January 2016 Bit of a different situation, for a start they are all under the NATO banner and as pointed out don't share a border with Russia. Right... So if Ukraine had nukes they would have send them to Moscow and the Russia would have retaliated and then we have WW3 - not really following your point. My point is, you clearly don't need nukes to not get nuked, for example Australia has none, most countries don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 6 January 2016 Share Posted 6 January 2016 Right... So if Ukraine had nukes they would have send them to Moscow and the Russia would have retaliated and then we have WW3 - not really following your point. My point is, you clearly don't need nukes to not get nuked, for example Australia has none, most countries don't. I thought you would jump to the most ridiculous extreme to try and prove a point again, I don't think I need to point out the geographical or political difference between Great Britain, Ukraine and Australia. No one knows if Russia would have still gone into Eastern Ukraine had they had nukes (or been a NATO member for that matter) I'd imagine the possibility would certainly have been lessened though, given Russia's response to Turkey shooting down their servicemen I think it would be slightly foolish to think it doesn't make any at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danny. Posted 6 January 2016 Share Posted 6 January 2016 No extremes intended, just an example off the top of my head without looking up a list of countries not covered by NATO or the Non-Proliferation Treaty. It's certainly not that far from North Korea geographically. I'm just not sure I see the point of having nukes as deterrents, if they are used then you have mutual destruction and the fallout would destroy so much of the planet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AKCJ Posted 6 January 2016 Share Posted 6 January 2016 Hydrogen bomb? That's what they want you to believe. They're clearly trying to kill Godzilla... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 6 January 2016 Share Posted 6 January 2016 No extremes intended, just an example off the top of my head without looking up a list of countries not covered by NATO or the Non-Proliferation Treaty. It's certainly not that far from North Korea geographically. I'm just not sure I see the point of having nukes as deterrents, if they are used then you have mutual destruction and the fallout would destroy so much of the planet. Australia is miles away from North Korea, it's major cities are probably a similar distance to how far away we are, although South Korea are the ones who really have to worry about recent developments. The last bit is exactly the point of having nukes as deterrents, mutual destruction is the deterrent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wymsey Posted 6 January 2016 Share Posted 6 January 2016 Can't see them being a threat than they want to be; certainly not much of a threat compared to Islamic State. That country doesn't appear to be happy with anything, apart from celebrating Kim Jong-il and Kimg Jong-un, and are using 'threats' to make other countries to remember that they exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rincewind Posted 6 January 2016 Share Posted 6 January 2016 I reviewed it yesterday Ken. You quoted it. I read so many posts that I forget them sometimes. I knew someone had mentioned it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 7 January 2016 Share Posted 7 January 2016 Can't see them being a threat than they want to be; certainly not much of a threat compared to Islamic State. That country doesn't appear to be happy with anything, apart from celebrating Kim Jong-il and Kimg Jong-un, and are using 'threats' to make other countries to remember that they exist. They could be far, far more of one if they wanted to be, but unlike the death-worshipping fascists they are still (somewhat rational) actors with a legitimate power base and so they're toeing the international line to a degree (even if it looks like they're not). I think that's the difference: The NK leadership has a fair bit of power and comfort (sending their kids to European and American universities, decent food, fast cars etc) and so they fear losing it. Daesh, by contrast, have very little and so have little to lose. But in terms of the potential harm they could do...a fully tooled nation state with the biggest standing army in the world against a tenuous quasi citystate spread across two countries that have much less numbers, equipment and military discipline and whos only real skill lies in propaganda and guerilla tactics? No brainer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Doctor Posted 7 January 2016 Share Posted 7 January 2016 Right... So if Ukraine had nukes they would have send them to Moscow and the Russia would have retaliated and then we have WW3 - not really following your point. My point is, you clearly don't need nukes to not get nuked, for example Australia has none, most countries don't. Australia doesn't need nukes to defend itself when it's got a menagerie of poisonous snakes, spiders and probably birds, because nature's a dick. It's a natural defence mechanism, like the Russian winter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bovril Posted 7 January 2016 Author Share Posted 7 January 2016 This test was inebidable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPH Posted 8 January 2016 Share Posted 8 January 2016 Australia doesn't need nukes to defend itself when it's got a menagerie of poisonous snakes, spiders and probably birds, because nature's a dick. It's a natural defence mechanism, like the Russian winter. Are you being serious? Australia doesn't need nukes because it's got snakes and spiders? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozleicester Posted 8 January 2016 Share Posted 8 January 2016 War, whillst an horrific situation is not what will change, borders, governments and lives in the future. Money will! As mentioned Australia does not have nukes, supposedly no need as the yanks love us and our proximity to Asia. Of course currently, large areas of Oz have been and are being bought up by the Chinese government through their state owned mining, shipping and farming companies, Oz relies on china for a good portion of our income now... thanks to the (falling away) iron ore mining boom. If we want to talk Armageddon, as Oz begins to slip into recession with no real way out (tourism and crocodile dundee films can only do so much), the Chinese government will continue to buy up the country to the point that they will quite simply "own" Australia, no invasion, no weapons, no deaths... just greed. Having said all that.. the Americans own even more... so maybe itll just become a bidding war? On my way increase my land holding and out to the bunker now http://www.smh.com.au/business/markets/chinas-australian-bond-ownership-is-bigger-than-we-thought-20151001-gjz2xy.html Anyway, if none of that happens... OZ is beginning its own attempt to take over the word.... https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/big-aussie-spider-caught-trying-to-sneak-into-nz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Doctor Posted 8 January 2016 Share Posted 8 January 2016 Are you being serious? Australia doesn't need nukes because it's got snakes and spiders? I thought it was quite obvious I was taking the piss, but never mind. Wouldn't trust the aussies with nukes though - we're talking about a country that went to war with emus and lost Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.