War

[nowitzki_prophecy]

I was waiting for someone else to post,though it have a couple of threads running,after all this is quite a topic,it wasnt happening so i decided to do it myself.
War is on our door step and the Mavs forum is silent?not when im around.
well,im kinda close to the subject since im from israel,so theres that small chance i'll ve nuked [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-frown.gif[/img]
personaly i think its about time sadam fall,he's been playing stalin in the modern world too long.

[Chiwas]

Come to Chihuahua; nothing happens here.

[nowitzki_prophecy]

you rather be nuked?that'll make it interesting over there.
but im just kiddin,i dont think he'll use that kind of weapons against us.

[Chiwas]

<< Iraq meets U.N. demand
Iraq today handed United Nations weapons inspectors a list of 500 scientists associated with its weapons programs. The list was demanded by chief inspector Hans Blix.

• Thousands of U.S. troops ordered to Gulf >>



This war is absurd.

[Evilmav2]

The game is about to end for Saddam and his Baathist criminal gang. Come January 27, thirty years of torture, murder, gangsterism, and graft are going to come to an end at the hand of flotillas of American air fleets. The air war will be over a week after the start of the campaign as the unprecedented and shocking power of precision guided munitions shatters the flimsy spine of the unfortunate Iraqi military infrastructure. The command and control centers will be blasted to powder by 2000 pound JDAMs and the armour on the ground will be decimated by Longbow directed gunships and Thunderbolts. Advance units of our valiant special forces will work in conjunction with oppressed Kurds and Shiites and cause a hemorage of internal destruction within Iraq (the motto of the Green Berets is apt: To Free the Oppressed). This rotting boil will fester for a week or two and then be lanced by the two armoured and three mechanized divisions of our heavy mobility strike force. The liberation will conclude with a return of freedom and food for the oppressed citizens of Iraq, and a protracted and peaceful occupation of Iraq by international forces under the aegis of the United Nations. The cancerous and malicious Iraqi dictatorship will be finished, and the long suffering Iraqi people will be freed to make better lives for themselves and their offspring...

And then the day of reckoning will come for the madmen of North Korea...


Advice to Iraqi regulars: stay well away from your vehicles upon the commencement of hostilities

[nowitzki_prophecy]

Damn man,or should i call you Sir?israeli troops will be involved too,we have our elite team entering iraq,&quot;sayeret matkal&quot;,some are saying the best ground force in the world.
but the U.S citizens can sleep at night,while israel is threatend,im not complaining about the way the U.S govermant does things,just wanted to tell you your lucky,all you have to worrie about is the soldiers.

[ÜberDirk]

Prophecy, I love the Israeli military, I live in Europe, I have an Israeli friend who is in your country's military. When Isreal retaliates, when they strike, they are quick, they are precise and they are deadly!

[Evilmav2]

Yup, the Israeli's have been prowling the Western desert for a while now. Their principle mission will be recon, but I know they have been outfitted with American laser targetting equipment and liason help. Silently they will stalk their prey, and when the air war begins their lazing targets will bring the appropriate laser guided munitions down on the heads of any Iraqi's unfortunate enough to be part of the maintenance group for any Scuds or other nefarious devices. Hopefully their efforts, along with those of the allied Anglo-American forces will prevent the Baathists from being able to make any futile but brutal attacks upon Israel. One way or the other though, crushing the vipers' nest in Iraq will make the world a little bit of a safer place for our Israeli allies, and all of the rest of the community of nations...

[Chiwas]

<< they are deadly >>

That's the problem...Saddam is deadly, Bin Ladden is deadly, Marines are deadly, North Corea is deadly, this coming war is going to be deadly, for the US, for Irak, for Israel, for Palestine, maybe for many other people (american citizens?). Irak is not Afganistan; it's too much stronger and maybe is capable to make a biological war into the States, you know how.

War is not a game. It's deadly for both sides.

It seems that Irak is cooperating with the UN; why continue to put Irak on the pressure? That's not a way to avoid war. This is an announced war. What a pity.

Peace is always our best weapon. IMHO.

(It´s more effective counteratacks terrorism with Intelligence, instead of soldiers; Intelligence saves lifes)

Peace for all, as OP uses to say.

[ÜberDirk]

Chiwas, it doesn't matter what Iraq say's to the UN. The fact is Sadam needs to be taken care of, there is no doubt that they have chemical and nuclear weapons, the world CANNOT sit back and wait for them to use them!

[nowitzki_prophecy]

<< Prophecy, I love the Israeli military, I live in Europe, I have an Israeli friend who is in your country's military. When Isreal retaliates, when they strike, they are quick, they are precise and they are deadly! >>



thanks,my brother is in the army,i'll soon be drafted too,i'll try to go elite.



<< Yup, the Israeli's have been prowling the Western desert for a while now. Their principle mission will be recon, but I know they have been outfitted with American laser targetting equipment and liason help. Silently they will stalk their prey, and when the air war begins their lazing targets will bring the appropriate laser guided munitions down on the heads of any Iraqi's unfortunate enough to be part of the maintenance group for any Scuds or other nefarious devices. Hopefully their efforts, along with those of the allied Anglo-American forces will prevent the Baathists from being able to make any futile but brutal attacks upon Israel. One way or the other though, crushing the vipers' nest in Iraq will make the world a little bit of a safer place for our Israeli allies, and all of the rest of the community of nations... >>



how the hell do you know that?!this shit is supposed to be clasified.





<< That's the problem...Saddam is deadly, Bin Ladden is deadly, Marines are deadly, North Corea is deadly, this coming war is going to be deadly, for the US, for Irak, for Israel, for Palestine, maybe for many other people (american citizens?). Irak is not Afganistan; it's too much stronger and maybe is capable to make a biological war into the States, you know how. >>



yea,im a man of piece too,but i believe that war with iraq is unavoidable,sadam lets the UN find what he wants them to find,were'nt you a bit surprised when a month ago he so eagerly forbiden any inspectors to come to iraq,than suddenly he decided they may come?a month is enough time to hide stuff in the great desert,stuff you dont want people to find.
dont confuse sadam' coning(i think you say it like that) with goodnes,the man is evil,a dictator,he stands against everything the western world stands for,which is freedom and equality,this war is unavoidable,and with him gone,the world would be much safer than it was.
you know,sometimes you do stuff because you know you have to,despite not liking the way its done.

[LRB]

<< That's the problem...Saddam is deadly, Bin Ladden is deadly, Marines are deadly, North Corea is deadly, this coming war is going to be deadly, for the US, for Irak, for Israel, for Palestine, maybe for many other people (american citizens?). Irak is not Afganistan; it's too much stronger and maybe is capable to make a biological war into the States, you know how.
War is not a game. It's deadly for both sides.
>>



Chiwas: It is true that war is not a game and is deadly. However the problems with North Korea and Iraq have result from wars of conquest that were started by North Korea and Iraq.

The North Korean was is ongoing and the United States has remained in a state of war with North Korea since 1950. While no side has launched any major offensives since 1953 when a cease fire agreement was reached, there have been countless &quot;border skirmishes&quot; resulting in 1000's of dead on both sides. South Korean/North Korean boder is considered a combat assignment by the US military and does frequently invlove combat. North Korea has refused for over 50 years to relent in its objective of conquering South Korea. The only thing stopping them from launching an offensive is the US military's threat of retaliation. If they could seriously lessen that threat with a premptive nuclear strike who knows if they would or not. They are also one of the major sellers of weapons to terrorists and nations that sponsor terrorists. Would they give a nuke to terrorists? Maybe. The only way to protect millions of innocent civilians world wide is to stop the program before they have a chance to use a nuke or give a nuke to those who might.

Iraq lost its war of aggression to conquer Kuwait. They surrendered and agreed to terms. Since then they have blatantly disreguarded those terms of surrender. They may say they are corrporationg, but they are not fully corroporating. They do sponsor terrorist who are at war with the US. The only sure way to keep Nukes out of terrorists hands is to destroy any in countries which support terrorists.

Iraq and North Korea do not need weapons of mass destruction for self-defense. They are perfectly capable of defending themselves from anyone but the US. We will only attack them because they have attacked us, attacked someone else, or are building weapons of mass destruction.

Another way to put it, how would you feel if your neighbor bought a gun, loaded it, and held it to your head threating to pull the trigger. When you called the police, they said they couldn't do anything until he shot you.

Also remember those who refuse to learn from history are forced to repeat their mistakes. We along with most of the world refused to do anything about Hitler when he ignored the terms of surrender for world war I and built up Germany's military. The result of not acting sooner was millions of lifes, many of them German civlians, lost. If we and others had stood up to Hitler sooner there would have been lose of life, but much less. The only choice we had was when to go to war and how many will die. I believe we have the same choices today. I do not want to see millions of people lose their lives because we invested in a fruitless cause for pease. For warmongers, and that is what the Sadaam and the North Korean rulers and the terrorists are, there is no chance of pease. The only question is when will you have a war and how many will die in it. These warmongers will target and kill innocent civilians with gusto. The more powerful you let them get, the more innocents who will die. I say we kill the SOB's and get it done with myself.

[Chiwas]

Saddam is a threat, there isn´t any confusion.


Edit:


<< (It´s more effective counteratacks terrorism with Intelligence, instead of soldiers; Intelligence saves lifes) >>

[nowitzki_prophecy]

<< Another way to put it, how would you feel if your neighbor bought a gun, loaded it, and held it to your head threating to pull the trigger. When you called the police, they said they couldn't do anything until he shot you. >>



good analogy!basicly what LRN said,i say.

[LRB]

<< Saddam is a threat, there isn´t any confusion.


Edit:


<< (It´s more effective counteratacks terrorism with Intelligence, instead of soldiers; Intelligence saves lifes) >>

>>



Chiwas: I won't argue that intelligence should be one of our main and foremost weapons against terrorists. To blindly send out soldiers to take action with little or no intelligence is senseless. Many times we feel the need to strike out at something whether it is our enemey or not. This should be avoided. But for intelligence to be valuable in any kind of war even with terrorists there must be a pointy end of the stick applied to the enemy. In most cases this will involve soldiers.

It should be noted that the US military has greatly increased it's ability to accomplish objectives with minimum lose of life on both sides. This is highly dependent on intelligence and intelligent weapons. In the Gulf war we had only about 10% or our bombs which were intelligently guided. Now over 80% are and those are much more precise and work in all kinds of weather. Intelligent weapons do little good if you don't know where to aim them though. I do think that we have that intelligence. We just need to start poking those places with the pointy stick.

[Chiwas]

<< We just need to start poking those places with the pointy stick. >>

Yes. This is applied Intelligence.

[Evilmav2]

In the Gulf war we had only about 10% or our bombs which were intelligently guided. Now over 80% are and those are much more precise and work in all kinds of weather. Intelligent weapons do little good if you don't know where to aim them though

That's what Dark Stars, Predators, and on-the-ground targeting help prevent. The armed forces of the United States have undergone a revolution in surveillance, target aquisition, and fast information exchange as well as weapons accuracy. Targets that would have required two days to task a mission to in 1991, will now be hit in hours. And those same targets will be constantly monitored by persistant drone coverage, and thus we can change tasking in real time in accordance with changes on the battlefield. The Iraqi military will be faced with an assault of unprecented accuracy, speed, and violence and will surrender in droves as soon as they can find Anglo-American forces to surrender to. Barring any unforseen criminal actions like a biological terror attack, this action will be over amazingly quickly and decisively...

[MFFL]

<< The armed forces of the United States have undergone a revolution in surveillance, target aquisition, and fast information exchange as well as weapons accuracy. >>



I watched &quot;Tora, Tora, Tora&quot; last night and I was awestruck at how incredibly inefficent the communications system used to be. The War Dept sent a TELEGRAM to Pearl Harbor warning them about the attack - and the telegram wasn't even marked urgent.

Now generals can even see what individual squads are doing via the helmet cam that the troops wear. Incredible.

[Dooby]

Seriously, can't we ask China to let us go in and whup up on N. Korea? If it weren't for China, we would have already done it. Surely, China is sick of North Korea's crap, too. Would China really object to having one more democratic neighbor?

[nowitzki_prophecy]

dont mistake North korea with iraq,North korea are much much stronger,i think they have the third biggest army in the world or something like that,entering North korea would make the U.S lose alot of good men,entering will cause a second vietnam war,and you must'nt forget korea already has nuclear weapons,sh's not like iraq,who the U.S is trying to stop developing A bombs and shit,if korea is put against a wall,it could mean catastrophy.

[Dooby]

I know their capabilities. There army is big but they are starving their people. They actually want to build and sell atomic weapons. They have to be stopped.

If we could keep China out of it, we could beat N. Korea in a month.

[LRB]

<< dont mistake North korea with iraq,North korea are much much stronger,i think they have the third biggest army in the world or something like that,entering North korea would make the U.S lose alot of good men,entering will cause a second vietnam war,and you must'nt forget korea already has nuclear weapons,sh's not like iraq,who the U.S is trying to stop developing A bombs and shit,if korea is put against a wall,it could mean catastrophy. >>



Sounds a lot like what was said of Iraq 11 years ago. Big army. Weapons of mass destruction. 2nd Vietnam war. If put up against a wall, it could mean catastrophy. Yada, yada, yada.

The US has the most technological and outright superior military force in the world. Period. No one is close. North Korea's Nuclear weapons will be take out on our 1st strike. Should they get one to survive and use it, it would be suicidal. We can and will turn that country into the world's largest microwave oven if need be.

The soviet military was the closest to the US. After the Gulf war they were scared sh*$less of us, and for good reason. We've only gotten better. The political fallout is and should be the major concern. If the politicians do not place unreasonable political constraints on the military, we can accomplish our objectives in a couple of weeks tops. The North Korean soldiers will be surrendering in droves at the 1st opportunity. I imagine that the North Koreans are attempting to sell nukes because their economy and their government is tottering on the brink as it is. War with the US will push it from the brink into the abyss.

Yes we will probably lose some men, but most likely very few. The odds are certainly in our favor for war to stop them versus letting them sell bombs to terrorists which could really cause catastrophic loses.

[Chiwas]

<< The odds are certainly in our favor for war to stop them versus letting them sell bombs to terrorists which could really cause catastrophic loses. >>

S&iacute;.

[Evilmav2]

North Korea's Nuclear weapons will be take out on our 1st strike. Should they get one to survive and use it, it would be suicidal. We can and will turn that country into the world's largest microwave oven if need be.

If we end up entering into action with the North Koreans expect to see some very creative thinking brought to task against the nuclear threat. We still have precision Trident and MX nukes designed to take out super-hardened missile silos in the former Soviet Union, and that would be the simplest answer in a preemptive strike situation. We also have hard-tipped, deep penetrating &quot;Bunker Busting&quot; 2000 lb laser guided bombs which should be up to the task of shattering North Korean missile launch capability. Invisible, and long-ranging B2's would silently deliver redundant and simultaneous strikes if this option was employed. Once the nuclear capacity was removed, the NK's military infrastructure would be exposed to the same kind of horrors that Iraq is poised to experience. Of course, the NK's could have hidden launch assets. If they do, I would expect some pretty arcane technologies to come into effect. A low-atmospheric Fuel Air explosive release might be used to smother possible launch areas in megaton-like effects (although that would be an extreme response). Electronic warfare assets might be employed to try to fry the electronics on any outbound and crude ICBM launch that escapes the initial strike, and AEGIS cruisers have long had some reputed ability to take down launched ICBM's before their entry into space. Other strange technologies like airborne chemical lasers and Van Allen-field disruption also might prove effective against the kind of outdated electronics of NK missiles (and in all actuality, the employment of such unproven technologies will be obscure, and the result of developmental abilities aquired since the early 1980's). An action against North Korea will entail more risks than the imminent destruction of the Baathists, but barring diplomatic appeasement, it will happen by the early Summer. Prospects are risky but fortuitous...

[nowitzki_prophecy]

<< The soviet military was the closest to the US. After the Gulf war they were scared sh*$less of us, and for good reason. We've only gotten better. The political fallout is and should be the major concern. If the politicians do not place unreasonable political constraints on the military, we can accomplish our objectives in a couple of weeks tops. The North Korean soldiers will be surrendering in droves at the 1st opportunity. I imagine that the North Koreans are attempting to sell nukes because their economy and their government is tottering on the brink as it is. War with the US will push it from the brink into the abyss. >>



Im sorry but almost all what you said was very much BS.
first of,iraq never had nuclear weapons,never!they had biological weapons,which they used against civilians in north iraq but never nuclear,its quite different.
you think you can just attack a country who has nuclear weapons like korea?!you cant just attack their silo,its not regualr bombs,if you attack the silo you'll wipe out half of the far east,i dont think you know how powerfull an H bomb is.
second,the all mighty U.S army is not above fear that he care not about the size of the other army,and the fact that he has the most threatening factor in the world.
no offense but havent showed much wizdom in that post.
if you invade N.Korea you would lose alot more than a few good man.



<< The US has the most technological and outright superior military force in the world. >>



Sorry to tell you but the israeli army which im proud to say will be joining in a year has matched the U.S army technology,and we're exchanging technologies.
israel has much more experience,and we're even training your air force occasionly.
BUT,the U.S army is much bigger,much much bigger,so its the strongest army in the world.
luckily it doesnt even matter,we're on the same side,and its a very good thing for us that we are,cause the U.S is helped israel tremendesly since it was founded.



<< Yes we will probably lose some men, but most likely very few. The odds are certainly in our favor for war to stop them versus letting them sell bombs to terrorists which could really cause catastrophic loses. >>



are you in the army,or will ever serve in the army?how can you dismiss human life,even if a dew so easily?

[Nash13]

If Sadaam doesn't have weapons of mass destruction, could this be another Operation Desert Storm?

[The Crippler]

China controls over 75% of N Korea's electricty supply. China doesn't want war with US right now. China will do what's right. N. Korea is not a threat, just trying to be one. Watch and see...

Iraq is a different story. They are a threat at this time. This war will be swift and decisive with only minimal US casulties.

[LRB]

<< Im sorry but almost all what you said was very much BS.
first of,iraq never had nuclear weapons,never!they had biological weapons,which they used against civilians in north iraq but never nuclear,its quite different.
you think you can just attack a country who has nuclear weapons like korea?!you cant just attack their silo,its not regualr bombs,if you attack the silo you'll wipe out half of the far east,i dont think you know how powerfull an H bomb is.
second,the all mighty U.S army is not above fear that he care not about the size of the other army,and the fact that he has the most threatening factor in the world.
no offense but havent showed much wizdom in that post.
if you invade N.Korea you would lose alot more than a few good man.
>>



First of all, I very much disagree that what I said was BS. Let's address your points:

1. Iraq did not have nuclear weapons to the best of my knowledge during the gulf war. That may or may not be true. But to get a nuclear bomb to explode in a nuclear explosion requires a precise timing of explosives surrounding the nuclear material. I have personally interviewed scientist who worked on them and my father was in the nuclear bomb project during the 50's. So I do have expert knowledge from some of the very best. Nuclear bombs have to be armed, they usually aren't stored this way. But even if they are, a silo busting bomb will have an insignificantly low chance of causing a nuclear explosion. What could happen is poisionous radioactive material could be spread in the local vicinity. Same with destroying chemical deposits. Iraq did have those. The risk is if we don't get the bomb and they can fire it somehow at a target. That takes a delivery system. Plane or missle or other transportation. The longer we wait the greater the chance of this happening. So your theory that by bombing North Korea's nuclear silos we would take out half the far east is total BS.

2. As far as the US Army, they don't have to fear North Korea's army size because they will not face them in mass. If you can't see, can't communicate and can't get supplies, you can't be effective. Our army is great and very good and is quite capable of taking on superior numbers and winning because of our technological advantages. But our 1st line of defense is our intelligence. We have incredible technological advances to allow us to gain uprecedented intelligence without risking human life. Next comes our Air Force and Navy. We have stealth strike air craft, intelligent bombs and missles which allow us to strike with minimal risk or life to us and to civilians, and even reduced chance of killing unecessary enemies military for that matter. Our army when it does operate, does so under air supremacy, with the enemies commuications cut off, and with superior intelligence. In essence we cheat, or rather we don't play fair. We keep the cards stacked in our favor.

3. No I am not in the military nor have I been. I would glady serve now if I was not past the age limit for induction though, and I sincerely wish I had taken advantage of the opportunity to inlist in at least the reserves before. However, I am not callous to lose of life. I do have close family members who are currently or will be serving in the US armed forces. I see stopping North Korea from producing and distributing nukes to terrorist and others who would have a high chance of using them as saving lives. Even if we have to lose several thousand lives to save several million lives, I think its worth it. I don't see us losing several thousand lives unless the politicians unduely cripple the military. Even if we only lose 1 live though is a huge tragedy. Unfortunately, I do not feel that we have a valid choise of not losing lives. BTW I have put my life and well being on the line in the past to help and save others and am willing to do so again. And yes I was very afraid when I did it, but I was more concerned about those who I was trying to save even in some cases I did not know them. So its great that you are volunteering for military service. I commend you. But don't be an arrogant jerk and assume that everyone who hasn't served in the military is either a coward or doesn't know the value of human life.

4. The Israeli military is one of the best and most technologically advanced military forces in the world. I have great respect for them. And your are of cource correct in that your army and ours share many of the same technological advantages. You might even have a few that we don't have. But you do not have close to all the technological advantages our military has and enjoys. Mainily because we have so much more money to spend than you. More than just size as in number of people in the military, but size as in money to spend gives us an advantage. That is in no way slighting your military. I personaly feel that for the resources you have, you are probably the most efficient military in the world. You have to be just to survive. And I salute you for that. But a B-2 stealth bomber, a world wide array of intelligence satellites, or a nuclear powered air craft carrier do not come cheap. There are many, many more technological aids that we have which just aren't public.

[OutletPass]

Come to Chihuahua; nothing happens here.

-- I'm on the way Chi...have the blonds ready...after reading this thread, I'll need two, one's just not enough !!!


NP - Best Wishes to you for the New Year and we send our hopes for that you and your country in this dangerous time.

[nowitzki_prophecy]

Thanks OP,and happy new year to us all,lets hope it'll be alot calmer and peacefull year for us all.



<< So its great that you are volunteering for military service. I commend you. But don't be an arrogant jerk and assume that everyone who hasn't served in the military is either a coward or doesn't know the value of human life. >>



first of,im not volunteering,in israel you have to join,but i believe i would have done it anyway.
secondly,i did'nt said anything like what you claimed i said,i did'nt said if you dont volunteer your a coward or anything like that,i was refering spesifacly to your comments,they showed very little respect for humen life,like its an expenditure.




<< 1. Iraq did not have nuclear weapons to the best of my knowledge during the gulf war. That may or may not be true. But to get a nuclear bomb to explode in a nuclear explosion requires a precise timing of explosives surrounding the nuclear material. I have personally interviewed scientist who worked on them and my father was in the nuclear bomb project during the 50's. So I do have expert knowledge from some of the very best. Nuclear bombs have to be armed, they usually aren't stored this way. But even if they are, a silo busting bomb will have an insignificantly low chance of causing a nuclear explosion. What could happen is poisionous radioactive material could be spread in the local vicinity. Same with destroying chemical deposits. Iraq did have those. The risk is if we don't get the bomb and they can fire it somehow at a target. That takes a delivery system. Plane or missle or other transportation. The longer we wait the greater the chance of this happening. So your theory that by bombing North Korea's nuclear silos we would take out half the far east is total BS. >>



I dont think you quite understood what i ment,what you have with N.Korea is identicel to the cold war the U.S had with the soviet union in the 60' i think.
you cant just bomb a country with nuclear capabileties,and im not refering to the fact that you may accadentely cause a nuclear hollorcost,im reffering to the fact that if you invade a country,you make her become a country who has nothing to lose,they may release a bomb,and when they release one H bomb,it doesnt matter if they have 50 or 50,000,or just a couple,they can destroy the world just as much,thats why the situation in INDIA-PAKISTAN is so dengerous.
its an ultimatom you can not brake.
it would be a war the U.S has never seen,very very deadly,you cant use all your technolegies,cant you see?
there are about seven if im not mistaken nuclear powers in the world,they are all known and not messed with.

[LRB]

<< Thanks OP,and happy new year to us all,lets hope it'll be alot calmer and peacefull year for us all.



<< So its great that you are volunteering for military service. I commend you. But don't be an arrogant jerk and assume that everyone who hasn't served in the military is either a coward or doesn't know the value of human life. >>



first of,im not volunteering,in israel you have to join,but i believe i would have done it anyway.
secondly,i did'nt said anything like what you claimed i said,i did'nt said if you dont volunteer your a coward or anything like that,i was refering spesifacly to your comments,they showed very little respect for humen life,like its an expenditure.




<< 1. Iraq did not have nuclear weapons to the best of my knowledge during the gulf war. That may or may not be true. But to get a nuclear bomb to explode in a nuclear explosion requires a precise timing of explosives surrounding the nuclear material. I have personally interviewed scientist who worked on them and my father was in the nuclear bomb project during the 50's. So I do have expert knowledge from some of the very best. Nuclear bombs have to be armed, they usually aren't stored this way. But even if they are, a silo busting bomb will have an insignificantly low chance of causing a nuclear explosion. What could happen is poisionous radioactive material could be spread in the local vicinity. Same with destroying chemical deposits. Iraq did have those. The risk is if we don't get the bomb and they can fire it somehow at a target. That takes a delivery system. Plane or missle or other transportation. The longer we wait the greater the chance of this happening. So your theory that by bombing North Korea's nuclear silos we would take out half the far east is total BS. >>



I dont think you quite understood what i ment,what you have with N.Korea is identicel to the cold war the U.S had with the soviet union in the 60' i think.
you cant just bomb a country with nuclear capabileties,and im not refering to the fact that you may accadentely cause a nuclear hollorcost,im reffering to the fact that if you invade a country,you make her become a country who has nothing to lose,they may release a bomb,and when they release one H bomb,it doesnt matter if they have 50 or 50,000,or just a couple,they can destroy the world just as much,thats why the situation in INDIA-PAKISTAN is so dengerous.
its an ultimatom you can not brake.
it would be a war the U.S has never seen,very very deadly,you cant use all your technolegies,cant you see?
there are about seven if im not mistaken nuclear powers in the world,they are all known and not messed with. >>



NP: 1st let me apologize or any misunderstandings. And thank you for clearing them up.

Yes, I understand your fear that if attacked somehow North Korea will be able to launch one of its nuclear weapons and explode it. You are correct that that would be a catastrophe.

I just think that they have few enough that we have a very good chance of either eliminating them completely or preventing them from bein used. But it is a risk still. I think it is wise to explore possible diplomatic solutions as alternatives. But the longer we wait before acting after our forces are ready to take action, the less likely it is that we will get them all. So by all means go full steam with diplomacy now up until we have our forces in position to act. But after that unless N. Korea is making significant positives steps to eliminating the weapons, we need to take them out.

The reason that I feel this way is 2 fold. Unlike the USSR, Pakistan, and India N. Korea is not making these weapons primarily for defense, but for offense. They will be used if we let them keep producing them. Probably not by the N Korean but by some rogue nation with a crazy running it or more likely a terrorist organization. Also the reson that we couldn't take out the USSR's nukes or they take out ours was we had too damn many of the things. The more you got the less chance someone has of taking them out before some can be used. So I see that the weapons will be used if not eliminated. The more weapons they get the less chance of eliminating them before they can be used. My opinion.

Anyways good luck with your military service. I do truely hope that both of our countries conflicts can be resolved without any more armed conflict. I just don't have a lot of optimism that that will be the case. I do hope that you come through everything safely.

[nowitzki_prophecy]

thanks LRB,happy new year and thanks for an interesting debate.