One question I'd LOVE to see how presidential candidates would react in a televised debate :

If the U.S. was attacked by 1 or more nuclear weapons by terrorists or another nation, would you be WILLING to strike back with nuke(s) ?

If it were terrorists, where would you aim your retaliatory strike?

its not a butten its a suitcase

If it were terrorists, where would you aim your retaliatory strike?

Good point. If a rogue band of terrorists, you probably couldn't.
But if you had a situation like Iran was funding and housing the terrorists that attacked, you could nuke one of Iran's large military bases, or the location where Iran hid the terrorist base camps.

well currently every nations boasts that nuke silos cant get over their territory

Good point. If a rogue band of terrorists, you probably couldn't.
But if you had a situation like Iran was funding and housing the terrorists that attacked, you could nuke one of Iran's large military bases, or the location where Iran hid the terrorist base camps.

Iran is controlled by Shias, and Bin Laden is Sunni. It's unlikely that Al Quida would be supported by Iran. What if the terrorists were (and probably are), sitting around in Pakistan, maybe on welfare (housing and funding). Are we going to nuke Pakistan?

A political pundit brought up an EXCELLENT idea the other day. He said the Presidential candidates should participate in a live televised War-games excercise. Showing how they would react during a National Security Crisis. Could you Imagine what Coservatives would say about Obama if he sat for 20 minutes while Americans were being burned alive by the hundreds?

They would decapitate and impale him on the metal gates surrounding 1600 Pennsylvania ave! There would be no mercy, he would be branded a traitor, and impeached!

If the USA were struk by nukes from another nation, there isn't a president, past or present, that wouldn't strike back with overwhelming force. He/She would be impeached and replaced with someone who would.

If it were a terrorist, then I don't think we should strike back with nukes, unless it had been found that another nation was enabling them. At any rate, instead of hemmorraging all this money through military action, the USA should pull out of Iraq, and spend a good portion of that money on covert activity. The CIA is estimated to get about $40-50 billion a year. Enlarge the agency's clandestine service, start making al qaeda and their supporters disappear and you won't have to fight too many wars over nukes. In today's world, occupational forces aren't the answer. Nation building isn't the answer. Being on the inside is.

~String

So if this nuclear device was set off and terrorists were to blame but they were from an Afghanistan base that were recruited from Iran but paid by Saudi Arabia and bought the plutonium from Russia to make the bomb then who would America strike back at?:shrug:

Ourselves. Patriot Act II, please submit for chip implantation.

Would you get chipped, spider?

its not a butten its a suitcase


Soon the suitcase will be replaced by a PDA....:D

Would you get chipped, spider?

After you pry the .50 cal from my cold dead hands!

Actually, I think the nuke question was asked of Clinton recently. I'll try and find it.

Edit: Clinton warns Iran of U.S. nuclear response (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24246275/)

After you pry the .50 cal from my cold dead hands!



You mean this one?

http://media.popularmechanics.com/images/tb_gun-lg-1.jpg

So if this nuclear device was set off and terrorists were to blame but they were from an Afghanistan base that were recruited from Iran but paid by Saudi Arabia and bought the plutonium from Russia to make the bomb then who would America strike back at?:shrug:

Nothing so ambiguous. And in any case, I would say that using nukes in terrorist cases would never be a good idea. Terrorists are stateless enemies.

But, let's just say that Iran supplied a nuke, then Iran should probably bet on getting back a little of what it dished out.

As a generality, I'm all for NOT using nukes. Even if I were the type to revel in other's annihilation, I would be selfish enough to say, "Um... er... guys, the nuclear shit that goes up, will come back down... and some of it over here."

please submit for chip implantation.

To quote Picard, "That'll be the day..."

I don't currently own any fire arms, but the day they start even offer a chip as a matter of choice (by way of some government or quasi-government program) is the day I start arming up.

Though, let's face it, as American's our defenses are up against this possibility. What is a distinct possibility is that corporations start "asking" their employees to get them for this-or-that reason, and in order to provide incentives they offer cash or some other material incentive. Were this the case, I think you'd see a lot of idiots saying, "Eh... what's the harm?"

~String

You mean this one?

Ah, no. This one:
http://www.jeremywise.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/50cal2.png