[vyper]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/coventry_warwickshire/4156197.stm

Parallel - too scary?

[aldo_14]

Did they ban them from wearing (fake) burberry too?

[Gank]

Originally posted by Crazy_Ivan80
@Gank: China too signed a deal with Iran.

So they did, worth over 100 billion with more on the way.  

Originally posted by Bobboau
if NK starts anything, there lible to just get themselves nuked.

No they're not.

[Martinus]

[color=66ff00]Gotta agree with Gank here Bob, the stigma surrounding nukes has never gone away, irrespective of the technological progress that has been made in 'clean nukes'.

If america where to nuke NK they'd make themselves a target of China who would simply take it as an excuse to 'situate' a few nukes on american soil pretty sharpish.

Then we're all shafted. Except for Australia. WTF mates?
[/color]

[Bobboau]

Originally posted by vyper
Your statement implies the concept of full spectrum dominance by the US military is real.

nukes are the weapon of last recorse, saying that we'd be forced to use our trump card at the cost of whatever remaining credibility we have left against what is basicly a third world country is not a statement of dominence.

[Rictor]

maeg: that depends on your definitions of "nuke". Low yield bunker busters designed specifically with NK in mind are being delevoped, in contravention of the Non Proliferation Treaty I might add. The fact that these are to be usable nukes, and AFAIK the dirtiest ones yet (biologically speaking) is not really doing of reassure me at the moment

But like I said, the chance of the US starting a war with NK, especially given the South's attitudes, is negligible.

[Unknown Target]

The US would not use nukes unless the enemy used them first. And even at that, they'd take caution and only nuke one or two "strategic" areas (not like you could get very strategic with nukes).

And I agree with Rictor: the chance of war with any other country is almost nil.

[Bobboau]

that's why I said "if NK starts anything"

[oohal]

Originally posted by Maeglamor
[color=66ff00]Then we're all shafted. Except for Australia. WTF mates?[/color]

you seem to foget the australia also supported the war(s)
also if NK does have nukes and got invaded they would proably be inclined to use them against the invaders

[Crazy_Ivan80]

Originally posted by Maeglamor
[color=66ff00]If america where to nuke NK they'd make themselves a target of China who would simply take it as an excuse to 'situate' a few nukes on american soil pretty sharpish.
[/color]

True, but take into account that China does not have the amount of nukes needed to bring down the US, while the opposite certainly is true. Something the Student-crushing-commies certainly are aware off.

[icespeed]

so what's the point of a war with north korea, exactly? i mean i know they've got nuclear weapons and all, but so do the u.s. how come no one else gets to make war on the u.s.? is that like kinda unfair or what?

and what's with 'clean' nukes, what's the point of them, isn't the point of weapons to make as much destruction as possible so as to scare the other bastard ****less?

[vyper]

No the point of effective weapons is to kill the other bastard as effectively as possible and then take his usable resources intact.

[icespeed]

but that depends on the point of the war, doesnt it? what does north korea have that the u.s. wants, apart from the ability to kill half the population at once?

[Bobboau]

the point of a war with Noth Korea is that North Korea wants to be called Korea, and unfortunately we are quite fond of the people in South Korea.
aliances. ideoligy. nationalism. ego.

and anyone can make war on us for what ever reason they want to, hell no reason at all, but it seems no one seems to think they can win against us.

[icespeed]

all prospective politicians should serve a mandatory period in the frontline of whatever available war/skirmish/somewhere there's fighting there is before serving their term of office.

it probably wouldn't deter them from making war, but at least they're not unknowingly getting other people killed.

[Bobboau]

what you think they don't know already?

[Gloriano]

Originally posted by Crazy_Ivan80


True, but take into account that China does not have the amount of nukes needed to bring down the US, .

True, but they need hit only to Strategic targets, and those targets are important to USA

[Bobboau]

I don't think they have the arsinal to hit enough targets to take out our retaliatory capasity fast enough to prevent us from removeing there half of the planet.

[Martinus]

Originally posted by oohal:
you seem to foget the australia also supported the war(s)
also if NK does have nukes and got invaded they would proably be inclined to use them against the invaders

[color=66ff00]It was a joke in referece to 'the end of the world' flash ani.[/color]

Originally posted by Crazy_Ivan80:
True, but take into account that China does not have the amount of nukes needed to bring down the US, while the opposite certainly is true. Something the Student-crushing-commies certainly are aware off.

[color=66ff00]No doubt but you're assuming that they'd only nuke america if they thought they'd be able to take out the entire country. There's nothing like telling your people that you've just leveled 12 or so of your enemy's largest cities to boost morale on your side and kill morale on the enemy's.
[/color]

[Martinus]

Originally posted by Bobboau
I don't think they have the arsinal to hit enough targets to take out our retaliatory capasity fast enough to prevent us from removeing there half of the planet.

[color=66ff00]You don't seem to understand, they alone do not have the capacity but once america launches it's all over, any country with nukes that is in proximity to america's targets will most likely launch.

India and Pakistan not to mention the Russians? That's a lot of nukes.
[/color]