"Nuclear weapons don't kill people. People kill people who don't have nuclear weapons."

Peace out.

/I laughed

+1.  Nice gag.

Mutuality Assured Destruction (MAD) only works if both sides want to live.


"sovereign right of every nation on the planet to engulf that planet in a hellish inferno"
Arn't nukes mostly just a blast wave? Is there really a lot of fire? I know Hiroshima and Nagasaki burned but I thought that was mostly do to buildings make out of bamboo with household fires in them.

I mean, if they wanted to kill you, they could still kill you with a knife! Banning nukes will do nothing.

The Stealth Hippopotamus: Mutuality Assured Destruction (MAD) only works if both sides want to live.


"sovereign right of every nation on the planet to engulf that planet in a hellish inferno"
Arn't nukes mostly just a blast wave? Is there really a lot of fire? I know Hiroshima and Nagasaki burned but I thought that was mostly do to buildings make out of bamboo with household fires in them.

Yes, when you split an atom, you
Don't release energy! Instead you release a soothing power of mint berries! The Japanese, in their euphoria, left their irons on and burned down their cities!

Stop getting your physics lessons from Indiana Jones.

The Stealth Hippopotamus: Mutuality Assured Destruction (MAD) only works if both sides want to live.


"sovereign right of every nation on the planet to engulf that planet in a hellish inferno"
Arn't nukes mostly just a blast wave? Is there really a lot of fire? I know Hiroshima and Nagasaki burned but I thought that was mostly do to buildings make out of bamboo with household fires in them.

Today's nukes are many times more powerful. Yes, there will be fire.

lack of warmth: I read that sober.  Can we have someone give their take after reading it stoned?

You know, from Kim Jong Un's point of view.

I'm on it!!!!

Hey, look what I found!




I remember the old footage of houses getting sweep away. I knew fire was invoved but I thought it was mostly the blast wave. So sue me I didn't know.



As you can see this house burned to the ground. oh no wait, that looks like a blast wave.


lack of warmth: You know, from Kim Jong Un's point of view.

With as many handlers as that guy has odds are he thought he wrote it. Well as much as he writes anything. Which is to say, he signed it.

The Stealth Hippopotamus: Hey, look what I found!




I remember the old footage of houses getting sweep away. I knew fire was invoved but I thought it was mostly the blast wave. So sue me I didn't know.



As you can see this house burned to the ground. oh no wait, that looks like a blast wave.


lack of warmth: You know, from Kim Jong Un's point of view.

With as many handlers as that guy has odds are he thought he wrote it. Well as much as he writes anything. Which is to say, he signed it.

It's both. So you get partial credit. The shock wave and the heat. If you look at the picture-the roof is on fire.

The fact that people eyes were melted and reduced to ash shadows on walls indicate temperatures were not balmy.

Darth_Lukecash: The shock wave and the heat. If you look at the picture-the roof is on fire.

I was of the belief you get the heat blast and then the shock wave puts out the resulting fire.

Whatever the case, a nasty way to go.

Darth_Lukecash: If you look at the picture-the roof is on fire.

Really? Looks like dust to me...

Odds are you're right, like I said I dont know. I'm learning stuff today!!

Diogenes: Whatever the case, a nasty way to go.

If I had to die because of a nuke I have to vote for the blast zone. Being just close enough to get poisoned would be a death I wouldn't wish on anyone.

From Wikipedia:

Blast - 40-50% of total energyThermal radiation - 30-50% of total energyIonizing radiation - 5% of total energy (more in a neutron bomb)Residual radiation - 5-10% of total energy

The Stealth Hippopotamus: Darth_Lukecash: If you look at the picture-the roof is on fire.

Really? Looks like dust to me...

Odds are you're right, like I said I dont know. I'm learning stuff today!!

Diogenes: Whatever the case, a nasty way to go.

If I had to die because of a nuke I have to vote for the blast zone. Being just close enough to get poisoned would be a death I wouldn't wish on anyone.

Oh, I gotta agree. A long painful radiation poisoning is so way to go.

Give me instant disintegration!

Firstly, I realize this is satire but it is a real issue so

1) Who the fark wants to nuke North Korea? The US and its allies would destroy them in any conventional warfare. Do they think anyone wants to take over their shiathole country? North Korea sounds like the 350lb chick with the wall eye and clubbed foot who wants a bottle of pepper spray because she's afraid of rape.

2) Then again, who are we to say they can't have nukes? What exactly is the authority we have over them that says, "We all can have them but you can't"? Not that I want them to have them because I think Kim Dong...whatever is a lunatic I just want to know what authority we have over them to tell them they can't.

Mugato: I just want to know what authority we have over them to tell them they can't.


Mugato: The US and its allies would destroy them in any conventional warfare.

It's really that simple. Same with Iran. As long as they think someone is going to protect them from Western Aggression ^TM they will talk and do as they please. If they lose that feeling life would change.


Darth_Lukecash: Give me instant disintegration!

don't sound so happy about it!

Mugato:
2) Then again, who are we to say they can't have nukes? What exactly is the authority we have over them that says, "We all can have them but you can't"? Not that I want them to have them because I think Kim Dong...whatever is a lunatic I just want to know what authority we have over them to tell them they can't.

What have we done about it? One of the more overlooked blunders of the Bush administration was Bush stating that we absolutely would NOT tolerate them having nukes. They tested a nuke and.... crickets. But hey, thank god we got Saddam out of power, right? Anyway the message we've sent is crystal clear: You can test nukes, and we won't do a thing about it, other than shaking our tiny fists and having the U.N. write a strongly worded letter or two.

If the shiat hits the fan, having a couple deliverable nukes (which they do NOT yet have) isn't going to turn the tide, it's just going to increase the casualties, which I'm sure Worst Korea is VERY concerned with, but the USA doesn't really have anything to worry about for now

born_yesterday: I'm pretty sure the reason the US and China both allow the status quo that is North Korea is because neither nation wants to be responsible for cleaning up that mess.  How many millions of starving people?  A complete and total lack of 20th century infrastructure?  Yeah, lets march right in and claim it.

Add to that (yes, it is selfish), they really do not have much in the way of natural resources that makes it worth while.  Yes, we collectively should be motivated my the human aspect of it all, but we are not.  They lack modern infristructure, modern farming techniques, etc.  Hell, they only export about $2B worth of stuff a year.

nekom: Mugato:
2) Then again, who are we to say they can't have nukes? What exactly is the authority we have over them that says, "We all can have them but you can't"? Not that I want them to have them because I think Kim Dong...whatever is a lunatic I just want to know what authority we have over them to tell them they can't.

What have we done about it? One of the more overlooked blunders of the Bush administration was Bush stating that we absolutely would NOT tolerate them having nukes. They tested a nuke and.... crickets. But hey, thank god we got Saddam out of power, right? Anyway the message we've sent is crystal clear: You can test nukes, and we won't do a thing about it, other than shaking our tiny fists and having the U.N. write a strongly worded letter or two.

If the shiat hits the fan, having a couple deliverable nukes (which they do NOT yet have) isn't going to turn the tide, it's just going to increase the casualties, which I'm sure Worst Korea is VERY concerned with, but the USA doesn't really have anything to worry about for now

The other problem that we face is let's say that they do lob a nuclear bomb or two into Seoul...so the US, Worst Korea and China decide to retaliate.  You know what Best Korea will do?  They will use women and children as human shields.  They will fill Pyongyang with thousands upon thousands of people then win the bombs drop, they will claim that the West has specifically targeted women and children.

I do honestly wonder how long this regime can last.  I would be surprised if it was around in another 25 years.  With they way technology is progressing, I suspect that Best Korea at some point will want to join the modern world.

U M.A.D. bro?

mayIFark: So, NRA and their supporters agrees, right?

They will defend S. Korea's right?

Will a snake start eating its tail?

Yeah right.

Here is a better one... let's collect some money for the New Black Panther Party to start a campaign using the same rhetoric as their NRA brethren.

I sleep safely at night knowing that a loaded nuclear silo is as close as the launch button on my nightstand.


Hah... oh man, he wishes.

RickN99: You lefties are just pissed Bush didn't start another "illegal" war for you to chant about.

Why what us "lefties" be pissed about that? That doesn't even make any sense.

Champion of the Sun: If Pakistan didn't have nukes, we would've destroyed every military installation they had for hiding OBL.  It's pretty clear that if you have nukes you can get away with anything.

No.  No, we would not have, since we need their help in stabilizing Afghanistan so we can GTFO from there.

Here's a funny thing: every country that's developed nuclear weapons has subsequently been involved in a conventional war, sometimes even with other nuclear armed nations.  In no case save for once by the US, were nuclear weapons actually used.  Obviously, nuclear weapons do not deter war.  They do not give you a license to do anything, other than to make threats and waste trillions of dollars on what amounts to no more than stroking your national ego.

North Korea does not need nuclear weapons to deter the US from invading, otherwise we would have already done so in the 50 odd years since the Korean war.  We're not invading because of China.