Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 11
Send Topic Print
Nukes (Read 9475 times)
Bobby.
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 112994
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Nukes
Reply #105 - Jan 29th, 2019 at 9:54pm
 
Brian Ross wrote on Jan 28th, 2019 at 9:59pm:
Bobby. wrote on Jan 28th, 2019 at 4:06pm:
dear Brian,
don't ignore the Jews and their Samson Option.


Who suggested I ignore it, Bobby?  I am sure that Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon are well aware of it.  The Iranians OTOH don't seem to care about it, despite being particularly vulnerable to a nuclear strike scenario...    Roll Eyes



Rubbish - The Iranians are very worried about Jewish nukes -

that's why they are building their own as a deterrent.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 112994
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Nukes
Reply #106 - Jan 29th, 2019 at 9:54pm
 
Should the Jews be disarmed?


Samson Option


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_Option

In 2003, a military historian, Martin van Creveld, thought that the Al-Aqsa Intifada then in progress threatened Israel's existence.[31] Van Creveld was quoted in David Hirst's The Gun and the Olive Branch (2003) as saying:

    We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets for our air force.

Let me quote General Moshe Dayan:

'Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother.' I consider it all hopeless at this point. We shall have to try to prevent things from coming to that, if at all possible. Our armed forces, however, are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Nukes
Reply #107 - Jan 30th, 2019 at 8:14am
 
freediver wrote on Jan 25th, 2019 at 12:29pm:
polite_gandalf wrote on Jan 24th, 2019 at 7:17pm:
freediver wrote on Jan 24th, 2019 at 12:41pm:
So you think Muslims could wipe out our species with a few hundred truck mounted nuclear bombs


No FD, that was your idiotic argument. I was ridiculing the idea.


You shifted the goalposts to 1000. That's about it. How many truck mounted nuclear bombs do you think Muslim nations would be able to coordinate before they lost count?


I shifted the goalposts? How do you figure that FD? I merely pointed out that for your " crazy muslims posing the exact same threat with nukes on trucks (LOL) as Trump and Putin with their fingers on the button" argument could only be valid if said crazy muslims had thousands of nukes, not hundreds.

Needless to say, the likelihood of crazy muslims managing hundreds of civilization destroying nuclear trucks (LOL) is absurd - let alone thousands. Even more absurd is the idiotic argument of freediver, which he is understandably trying to worm out of, that says that either scenario is just as plausible, and just as likely as the threat posed by Trump and Putin having their finger on close to 10 thousand nukes mounted on ICBMs that could be deployed literally anywhere on earth within minutes.
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
DonDeeHippy
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Cool Stuff

Posts: 2782
Australia
Gender: male
Re: Nukes
Reply #108 - Jan 30th, 2019 at 8:17am
 
Bobby. wrote on Jan 29th, 2019 at 9:54pm:
Should the Jews be disarmed?


Samson Option


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_Option

In 2003, a military historian, Martin van Creveld, thought that the Al-Aqsa Intifada then in progress threatened Israel's existence.[31] Van Creveld was quoted in David Hirst's The Gun and the Olive Branch (2003) as saying:

    We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets for our air force.

Let me quote General Moshe Dayan:

'Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother.' I consider it all hopeless at this point. We shall have to try to prevent things from coming to that, if at all possible. Our armed forces, however, are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under.

Why r u quoting Dayan that has been out of politics for 40 years and dead for 38 years...… his old world views r hardly relevant to modern Israel Wink
Back to top
 

I am me
 
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 112994
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Nukes
Reply #109 - Jan 30th, 2019 at 3:09pm
 
Dear Don,
It's part of more recent comments.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
PZ547
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 9282
Gender: male
Re: Nukes
Reply #110 - Jan 30th, 2019 at 4:30pm
 
There's a choice.  War.  Or sterilisation. OR eugenics

It's a psychopaths' playground

War provides untold riches for the already rich, including the 96% monopoly media. Not to mention the spin-off as with all wars going back through history, i.e., books, movies, docos, etc.

Factor in the overhyped climate-change and what do you see?  Yes, too many humans on this finite ball Earth

Which will the psychopaths choose while still peddling lucrative climate change?  Of course, they'll opt for war.  As they have -- little wars, phony wars, orchestrated wars, etc.

There's a ton of information about the non viability of nukes.  But nukes are the current boogey man


People should be keeping their eyes on water instead of nukes.  Water wars on the horizon and the psychopaths have invested trillions in the project via geoengineering and Chemtrails


I've mentioned it before but it neve gains much traction.  Way back in 1995, almost by accident, I came across Australian Govt. passing of Acts forbidding the collection of rainwater, the use of springs and rivers, streams etc. on privately owned land, and so on.  All passed and ready to be enacted when the psychopaths deem the time to be 'right'.  That information is  no longer available online, to my knowledge, but it used to be, when the interwebs were young and public servants were entrusted with documents and information


We're having an engineered climate change.  Deliberate climate change but not as it's reported by Attenborough and his cronies


Don't worry about nukes.  You have far more chance of dying of thirst in the future.  And when you can't flush the toilet or have a shower, most would choose to be dead anyway
Back to top
 

All my comments, posts & opinions are to be regarded as satire & humour
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Online


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 51295
At my desk.
Re: Nukes
Reply #111 - Jan 30th, 2019 at 7:52pm
 
polite_gandalf wrote on Jan 30th, 2019 at 8:14am:
freediver wrote on Jan 25th, 2019 at 12:29pm:
polite_gandalf wrote on Jan 24th, 2019 at 7:17pm:
freediver wrote on Jan 24th, 2019 at 12:41pm:
So you think Muslims could wipe out our species with a few hundred truck mounted nuclear bombs


No FD, that was your idiotic argument. I was ridiculing the idea.


You shifted the goalposts to 1000. That's about it. How many truck mounted nuclear bombs do you think Muslim nations would be able to coordinate before they lost count?


I shifted the goalposts? How do you figure that FD? I merely pointed out that for your " crazy muslims posing the exact same threat with nukes on trucks (LOL) as Trump and Putin with their fingers on the button" argument could only be valid if said crazy muslims had thousands of nukes, not hundreds.

Needless to say, the likelihood of crazy muslims managing hundreds of civilization destroying nuclear trucks (LOL) is absurd - let alone thousands. Even more absurd is the idiotic argument of freediver, which he is understandably trying to worm out of, that says that either scenario is just as plausible, and just as likely as the threat posed by Trump and Putin having their finger on close to 10 thousand nukes mounted on ICBMs that could be deployed literally anywhere on earth within minutes.


Do you have any rational arguments, other than inserting LOL?

How do you weigh the greater willingness of Muslims to use nukes up against their general incompetence?

BTW, I am not arguing it is a similar threat at the moment. But it would be far more likely if we were stupid enough to follow your suggesting of everyone voluntarily giving up nukes.
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 44684
Re: Nukes
Reply #112 - Jan 30th, 2019 at 8:07pm
 
Bobby. wrote on Jan 29th, 2019 at 9:54pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Jan 28th, 2019 at 9:59pm:
Bobby. wrote on Jan 28th, 2019 at 4:06pm:
dear Brian,
don't ignore the Jews and their Samson Option.


Who suggested I ignore it, Bobby?  I am sure that Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon are well aware of it.  The Iranians OTOH don't seem to care about it, despite being particularly vulnerable to a nuclear strike scenario...    Roll Eyes



Rubbish - The Iranians are very worried about Jewish nukes -

that's why they are building their own as a deterrent.


In part but actually they are building them to threaten the Saudis with if they fail to turn control of the holy sites over to Sh'ite control. Bobby.  Yes, it is crazy.  Just as crazy as the Saudis buying IRBMs from China in the late 1980s - which they did.  Perhaps they also bought some surprise warheads for the Iranians?  Who knows?

The Iranians also observed what happened to Saddam Hussein.  They are frightened of a US led "regime change" operation against them.  Nuclear weapons OTOH, allow them to deter that, with their own "Samson Option".   The US is very scared of losing it's ability to bully countries - it is why Trump has put so much effort into stopping the DPRK from gaining ICBMs and nuclear warheads.

Back to top
 

It seems that I have upset a Moderator and are forbidden from using memes. So much for Freedom of Speech. Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 112994
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Nukes
Reply #113 - Jan 30th, 2019 at 8:19pm
 
freediver wrote on Jan 30th, 2019 at 7:52pm:
Do you have any rational arguments, other than inserting LOL?

How do you weigh the greater willingness of Muslims to use nukes up against their general incompetence?

BTW, I am not arguing it is a similar threat at the moment. But it would be far more likely if we were stupid enough to follow your suggesting of everyone voluntarily giving up nukes.



Dear FD,
we'll never totally get rid of nukes but what about
all sides reducing the number if them to tiny numbers?
Why can't they do that?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 112994
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Nukes
Reply #114 - Jan 30th, 2019 at 8:20pm
 
Brian Ross wrote on Jan 30th, 2019 at 8:07pm:
Bobby. wrote on Jan 29th, 2019 at 9:54pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Jan 28th, 2019 at 9:59pm:
Bobby. wrote on Jan 28th, 2019 at 4:06pm:
dear Brian,
don't ignore the Jews and their Samson Option.


Who suggested I ignore it, Bobby?  I am sure that Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon are well aware of it.  The Iranians OTOH don't seem to care about it, despite being particularly vulnerable to a nuclear strike scenario...    Roll Eyes



Rubbish - The Iranians are very worried about Jewish nukes -

that's why they are building their own as a deterrent.


In part but actually they are building them to threaten the Saudis with if they fail to turn control of the holy sites over to Sh'ite control. Bobby.  Yes, it is crazy.  Just as crazy as the Saudis buying IRBMs from China in the late 1980s - which they did.  Perhaps they also bought some surprise warheads for the Iranians?  Who knows?

The Iranians also observed what happened to Saddam Hussein.  They are frightened of a US led "regime change" operation against them.  Nuclear weapons OTOH, allow them to deter that, with their own "Samson Option".   The US is very scared of losing it's ability to bully countries - it is why Trump has put so much effort into stopping the DPRK from gaining ICBMs and nuclear warheads.




It's about time that nuclear weapons were reduced to a few dozen not 20,000 or more.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Online


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 51295
At my desk.
Re: Nukes
Reply #115 - Jan 30th, 2019 at 8:21pm
 
Bobby. wrote on Jan 30th, 2019 at 8:19pm:
freediver wrote on Jan 30th, 2019 at 7:52pm:
Do you have any rational arguments, other than inserting LOL?

How do you weigh the greater willingness of Muslims to use nukes up against their general incompetence?

BTW, I am not arguing it is a similar threat at the moment. But it would be far more likely if we were stupid enough to follow your suggesting of everyone voluntarily giving up nukes.



Dear FD,
we'll never totally get rid of nukes but what about
all sides reducing the number if them to tiny numbers?
Why can't they do that?


It is my understanding they already have. Not exactly "tiny numbers" but enough to reduce the risk of total annihilation.
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 112994
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Nukes
Reply #116 - Jan 30th, 2019 at 8:25pm
 
freediver wrote on Jan 30th, 2019 at 8:21pm:
Bobby. wrote on Jan 30th, 2019 at 8:19pm:
freediver wrote on Jan 30th, 2019 at 7:52pm:
Do you have any rational arguments, other than inserting LOL?

How do you weigh the greater willingness of Muslims to use nukes up against their general incompetence?

BTW, I am not arguing it is a similar threat at the moment. But it would be far more likely if we were stupid enough to follow your suggesting of everyone voluntarily giving up nukes.



Dear FD,
we'll never totally get rid of nukes but what about
all sides reducing the number if them to tiny numbers?
Why can't they do that?


It is my understanding they already have. Not exactly "tiny numbers" but enough to reduce the risk of total annihilation.



I doubt that - there are still at least 10,000 of them in the world -
maybe even 20,000 or more.

Just one submarine could wipe out the entire continent of Europe in 20 minutes.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Online


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 51295
At my desk.
Re: Nukes
Reply #117 - Jan 30th, 2019 at 8:31pm
 
Thanks Booby. Your guesses saved me having to google for myself.
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 112994
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Nukes
Reply #118 - Jan 30th, 2019 at 9:01pm
 
freediver wrote on Jan 30th, 2019 at 8:31pm:
Thanks Bobby. Your guesses saved me having to google for myself.




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_with_nuclear_weapons


From a high of 70,300 active weapons in 1986, as of 2018 there are approximately 3,750 active nuclear warheads and 14,485 total nuclear warheads in the world.[1] Many of the decommissioned weapons were simply stored or partially dismantled, not destroyed.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Online


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 51295
At my desk.
Re: Nukes
Reply #119 - Jan 30th, 2019 at 9:51pm
 
So that's about a factor of 20 reduction. It might also explain Gandalf changing his mind from "hundreds" to "thousands" being necessary to wipe out humans.
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 11
Send Topic Print