Is it JUST nuclear weapons but also the notion that the US has shown that they are willing to use major weapons against their enemies to end conflicts?

 

 

The fact that we are the only country to have ever used one in combat certainly doesn't hurt.

Having enough nuclear weapons to either survive a first attack and counter-attack as well as having enough to completely destroy a target country is a strong deterrent against a nuclear attack. I don't think the significance of that can be overstated, personally.

 

:thumb:

 

MAD

 

That may not matter with religious extremists who don't care to die, but it works with pretty much everybody else.

FWIW, I don't see the big deal with revealing a specific number. We have more than enough nukes...that is clear. An exact count doesn't mean much.

 

Besides that, I'm skeptical about whether they'd be telling the truth. We've probably got another thousand or two hid somewhere.

Actually it should be part of the topic.

 

If we are going to worry about other countries knowing about how many nuclear weapons we have shouldn't we be preparing our people for the inevitable? They did back in the 1960's when it was a very good possibilty of an attack.

 

I meant I needed back on topic.

 

 

 

Anyway, I agree everyone knew a rough estimate of what the US and Russia had, its Pakistan, India, China, and a few more that I would like to know an exact number on, its this will not solve that problem.

Then why release the information? Someone help with the "angle", if there is one.

 

 

To help prepare for the "New world Order" so we can be ran by one government. just like in the Book of Revelation. It is all a plan.

5,000 is still enought to wipe out the planet and make sure no one lives.

Then why release the information? Someone help with the "angle", if there is one.

 

Transparency government remember. They can claim this as one of the examples of them being transparent and hope that we forget all of the moments (Health Care Reform) that they were not.

5,000 is still enought to wipe out the planet and make sure no one lives.

 

Actually, it is not enough to destroy the planet, ala the Death Star from Star WArs. So something on one of those learning channels that said we would need substantially more (like 100,000 times more) nuclear warheads to blow up the planet than what we have.

Actually, it is not enough to destroy the planet, ala the Death Star from Star WArs. So something on one of those learning channels that said we would need substantially more (like 100,000 times more) nuclear warheads to blow up the planet than what we have.

 

You don't have to blow up the planet to destroy it. I'm confident we have enough warheads on Earth to wipe out all living things, combining the blasts with their aftermath.

Actually, it is not enough to destroy the planet, ala the Death Star from Star WArs. So something on one of those learning channels that said we would need substantially more (like 100,000 times more) nuclear warheads to blow up the planet than what we have.

 

Yeah but I thought if another A bomb was dropped it could kill the ozone layer.

Yeah but I thought if another A bomb was dropped it could kill the ozone layer.

 

That I have no clue about.

You don't have to blow up the planet to destroy it. I'm confident we have enough warheads on Earth to wipe out all living things, combining the blasts with their aftermath.

 

:thumb:

You don't have to blow up the planet to destroy it. I'm confident we have enough warheads on Earth to wipe out all living things, combining the blasts with their aftermath.

 

 

And even one will do far more damage than people are alluding to here. The aftermath is possibly even more devastating when you consider the length of time the after effects will linger....into generations when you think of the deformities and genetic issues for people, and the effects on the ecosystem.

 

I think people think a bomb just harms the target it's dropped on....

And even one will do far more damage than people are alluding to here. The aftermath is possibly even more devastating when you consider the length of time the after effects will linger....into generations when you think of the deformities and genetic issues for people, and the effects on the ecosystem.

 

I think people think a bomb just harms the target it's dropped on....

A conventional bomb, yes. A nuke, no. They'd be pretty dim to think that.

And even one will do far more damage than people are alluding to here. The aftermath is possibly even more devastating when you consider the length of time the after effects will linger....into generations when you think of the deformities and genetic issues for people, and the effects on the ecosystem.

 

I think people think a bomb just harms the target it's dropped on....

 

The ones that we (and the Russians) have in stock today make the ones dropped on Japan look like firecrackers.

 

Check out the Tsar Bomba, the most powerful nuclear weapons yet made and tested. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_bomba