$20.00
$5.00
$15.00
Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
31 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » Religion, Sex, and Politics

Subject: Trump: "Why can't we use nuclear weapons?" rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Xander Fulton
United States
Lake Oswego
Oregon
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
So, yes, it's hearsay, but...



Guys, no. C'mon, now. Joke was funny, at first - I'll admit, we all got a good laugh out of it, but...

Seriously, where's your real candidate?
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christopher Seguin
United States
Cleveland
Ohio
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
XanderF wrote:
So, yes, it's hearsay, but...



Guys, no. C'mon, now. Joke was funny, at first - I'll admit, we all got a good laugh out of it, but...

Seriously, where's your real candidate?


Oh, Lord, how I wish I knew...I wish I knew...
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Pustilnik
United States
Brooklyn
New York
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I am a strong opponent of Trump, but if Trump was asking questions during a briefing, that implies that he was taking the briefing seriously, and wanted to learn more. Perhaps he asked about nuclear weapons three times because he felt he didn't fully understand the answer yet. So this actually raises my opinion of Trump a little.

But as the OP pointed out, it is hard to conclude much from this hearsay story.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sam I am
United States
Portage
Michigan
flag msg tools
What did I tell you...
badge
NO PICKLE!
mbmbmbmbmb
I watch "Morning Joe" almost every day. He's a big C conservative. Mika's annoying. I think even Joe has given up on Trump. He even seems to be fanning the anti-Trump fire. I've speculated that he sees what going to happen. When it gets completely out of control and a HRC presidency is all but inevitable he'll start an on air 'campaign' to save the House and Senate. "HRC's bad and we need the House and Senate to keep her in check."
1 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Xander Fulton
United States
Lake Oswego
Oregon
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
MikePustilnik wrote:
I am a strong opponent of Trump, but if Trump was asking questions during a briefing, that implies that he was taking the briefing seriously, and wanted to learn more. Perhaps he asked about nuclear weapons three times because he felt he didn't fully understand the answer yet. So this actually raises my opinion of Trump a little.

But as the OP pointed out, it is hard to conclude much from this hearsay story.



I don't think "why can't we just use nukes" indicates 'taking the briefing seriously'. "Using nukes" is the correct answer to no problem, aside from maybe 'how do we end civilization'.

Indeed, it almost comes off more dismissive of problems - IE., 'I'm bored talking about this overseas issue, why can't we just nuke them and forget about it? No really, is that an option?'
11 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
rcbevco wrote:
I watch "Morning Joe" almost every day. He's a big C conservative. Mika's annoying. I think even Joe has given up on Trump. He even seems to be fanning the anti-Trump fire. I've speculated that he sees what going to happen. When it gets completely out of control and a HRC presidency is all but inevitable he'll start an on air 'campaign' to save the House and Senate. "HRC's bad and we need the House and Senate to keep her in check."
To be fair many conservatives have opposed him from the start.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
XanderF wrote:
MikePustilnik wrote:
I am a strong opponent of Trump, but if Trump was asking questions during a briefing, that implies that he was taking the briefing seriously, and wanted to learn more. Perhaps he asked about nuclear weapons three times because he felt he didn't fully understand the answer yet. So this actually raises my opinion of Trump a little.

But as the OP pointed out, it is hard to conclude much from this hearsay story.



I don't think "why can't we just use nukes" indicates 'taking the briefing seriously'. "Using nukes" is the correct answer to no problem, aside from maybe 'how do we end civilization'.

Indeed, it almost comes off more dismissive of problems - IE., 'I'm bored talking about this overseas issue, why can't we just nuke them and forget about it? No really, is that an option?'
That is my take on it, now maybe I am more educated and brainier then Donny, but I understand why we cannot use nukes with out having to ask a general.

Of course we need to know context (and even if this is true), and I cannot believe even Donny is this clueless.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J.D. Hall
msg tools
Hearsay is a nice way to say rumors. I wouldn't put this past Trump, but I also would believe he said nothing of the sort.


rcbevco wrote:
I watch "Morning Joe" almost every day. He's a big C conservative. Mika's annoying.

Yeah, Mika's annoying. But hot. To be honest, though, I don't watch any of the morning "news" shows except to catch the weather forecast.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sam I am
United States
Portage
Michigan
flag msg tools
What did I tell you...
badge
NO PICKLE!
mbmbmbmbmb
remorseless1 wrote:
Hearsay is a nice way to say rumors. I wouldn't put this past Trump, but I also would believe he said nothing of the sort.


rcbevco wrote:
I watch "Morning Joe" almost every day. He's a big C conservative. Mika's annoying.

Yeah, Mika's annoying. But hot. To be honest, though, I don't watch any of the morning "news" shows except to catch the weather forecast.


I think Joe picked her because of her family connections, hotness and she a living straw-person liberal.

They use "Peter Pumpkin Head" and another XTC song as a bumper. If it's Joe's influence it makes me like him even more.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Born To Lose, Live To Win
United States
Cleveland Heights
Ohio
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Trump must be a Gwar fan.


Hiroshima, A shadow burned in time
Nagasaki, naked baby melts alive
Burnt flesh and rubble from sea to dead shore
Such a hideous theatre of war
But that was the end--Why?
There are so many more that must die
Is that not part of the plan?
I must use the nukes
I can't kill you all with my hands

Hydrogen bomb, new signs of doom
Thermo-nuclear, neutron bomb too...
You say these devices must never be used
I say you're mistaken, let's get to the fuse

Bring--Bring back the bomb
This is state policy, "by other means"
Your life ends in terror, this is now decreed
This is the twisting of bloody steel beams
The bomb blows air backwards, there's no time to scream
When they tested the A-bomb, they had a real fear
The blast will destroy your sweet atmosphere
But far more important as power increases
Was wasting the planet in well-ordered pieces

Bring--bring back the bomb
Bring--bring--bring--bring back the bomb

Bring back the bomb
It's been far too long
Sumon the brazen war chariot
Bring back the bomb
what makes it so wrong?
Release the beast, you can't bury it

Hoi
Hrup [8x]

Why should the fire be shared with so few?
Let bombs explode, 'cause that's what they do
Nuke Mecca, New York, the Vatican too
Give me a bomb, I'll drop it on you
Why stop at only two?
You showed the world just what it can do
What a waste not to destroy
Come play at war, man, and bring your best toy

Who gives a fuck about a nuclear war?
Let bombs explode, because that's what they're for
Last minute warning, the sirens they sing
Chaos, the reason, death, what we bring

Humans now look to the sky!
You worship missiles, yet they know no side
I guess it was all a lie
So grab ass with both hands, it's your turn to die

Die--it's your turn to die [x2]
Lies--they killed you with lies
Die, human, die

And while we're at it, let's go nuke Tibet
Let's vaporize the oceans with glee
Saving the whales an agenda for some
Nuking them sits well with me
Bring back the bomb
They know not what they do
Bring--bring--bring back the bomb
Bring--bring-bring--bring back the bomb
Bring back the bomb
They know not what they do
Bring--bring--bring back the bomb
Bring--bring--bring--bring back the bomb

Bring back the bomb it's been far too long
Summon the brazen war chariot
Bring back the bomb
What makes it so wrong?
Release the beast, you can't bury it
Hoi!
What makes it so wrong?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Xander Fulton
United States
Lake Oswego
Oregon
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
TheChin! wrote:
Trump must be a Gwar fan.



...to be fair, I have been half expecting Jeremy to show up in the thread with something along the lines of "As usual, Trump makes some great points. Why haven't we used nuclear weapons in a tactical fashion more often? It's something we should look into!"
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Based upon my poor understanding of history, science, and ethics...
United States
North Pole
Alaska
flag msg tools
What is the point of building and maintaining them (it ain't cheap) if no one thinks you'll ever use them?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Koldfoot wrote:
What is the point of building and maintaining them (it ain't cheap) if no one thinks you'll ever use them?


News Flash: We don't want Koldfoot to be President, either.
18 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Based upon my poor understanding of history, science, and ethics...
United States
North Pole
Alaska
flag msg tools
DaviddesJ wrote:
Koldfoot wrote:
What is the point of building and maintaining them (it ain't cheap) if no one thinks you'll ever use them?


News Flash: We don't want Koldfoot to be President, either.


Answer the question.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Really, I can't explain anything to you. I know better than to try.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Pustilnik
United States
Brooklyn
New York
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Koldfoot wrote:
What is the point of building and maintaining them (it ain't cheap) if no one thinks you'll ever use them?


We build nuclear weapons as a deterrent to nuclear weapons being used on us or on our allies.

For example, the Soviets didn't nuke us because they thought we would respond by nuking them. And vice versa. But this is obvious, right?
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Xander Fulton
United States
Lake Oswego
Oregon
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Koldfoot wrote:
DaviddesJ wrote:
Koldfoot wrote:
What is the point of building and maintaining them (it ain't cheap) if no one thinks you'll ever use them?


News Flash: We don't want Koldfoot to be President, either.


Answer the question.


The point is that their only use is to 'end civilization'. So you have them as a deterrent - IE., no enemy will believe they can destroy your country without themselves being destroyed in return, so they don't destroy your country when they otherwise would want to.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Based upon my poor understanding of history, science, and ethics...
United States
North Pole
Alaska
flag msg tools
XanderF wrote:
Koldfoot wrote:
DaviddesJ wrote:
Koldfoot wrote:
What is the point of building and maintaining them (it ain't cheap) if no one thinks you'll ever use them?


News Flash: We don't want Koldfoot to be President, either.


Answer the question.


The point is that their only use is to 'end civilization'. So you have them as a deterrent - IE., no enemy will believe they can destroy your country without themselves being destroyed in return, so they don't destroy your country when they otherwise would want to.


Who thinks we would retaliate with one?

If a terrorist got ahold of a black market ex-USSR Republic nuke, who would we retaliate against?

I dare say, you don't seriously think there would be nuclear retaliation. Who do you propose is more foolish than you?

Edit: is ex-USSR Republic redundant? I suppose it is. Good enough. The question stands as is.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mac Mcleod
United States
houston
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Owning nuclear weapons stops other nations from launching a large scale conventional or nuclear attack against countries who possess large amounts of nuclear weapons (over 50 is probably "large" numbers).

It's impossible to mass a fleet to invade for example. It's impossible to field a large concentrated army for example.

Nations which lack nuclear weapons are vulnerable to attack or invasion if they have things of value (oil) and don't have nuclear weapons or the protection of a nuclear power.

It gives anyone pause to start a direct war. Wars are actually way down historically speaking. The number killed in wars is declining. Starting a serious war with a nuclear power always has the potential to escalate to a nuclear war.

After Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki it is clear that it is in the united states moral capability to firebomb and use nuclear weapons on cities.

Why do you think we don't need nuclear weapons while china and ussr have 1000's of nuclear weapons?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Just to add some facts to this exchange, US policy is NOT to commit to No First Use of nuclear weapons. I.e., it is official US policy that we might under some circumstances use nuclear weapons to preempt a threatened nuclear attack, or destroy other weapons of mass destruction that might be or might already have been used against the US or our allies. However, the policy states:

The United States will not use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapons states that are party to the NPT and in compliance with their nuclear non-proliferation obligations.

and therefore a US response to even large-scale attacks with weapons of mass destruction by non-nuclear states would be limited to conventional weapons.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Based upon my poor understanding of history, science, and ethics...
United States
North Pole
Alaska
flag msg tools
DaviddesJ wrote:
Just to add some facts to this exchange, US policy is NOT to commit to No First Use of nuclear weapons. I.e., it is official US policy that we might under some circumstances use nuclear weapons to preempt a threatened nuclear attack, or destroy other weapons of mass destruction that might be or might already have been used against the US or our allies. However, the policy states:

The United States will not use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapons states that are party to the NPT and in compliance with their nuclear non-proliferation obligations.

and therefore a US response to even large-scale attacks with weapons of mass destruction by non-nuclear states would be limited to conventional weapons.


So you agree with me?

I must be wrong.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Pustilnik
United States
Brooklyn
New York
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Koldfoot wrote:

Who thinks we would retaliate with one?

If a terrorist got ahold of a black market ex-USSR Republic nuke, who would we retaliate against?

I dare say, you don't seriously think there would be nuclear retaliation. Who do you propose is more foolish than you?

Edit: is ex-USSR Republic redundant? I suppose it is. Good enough. The question stands as is.


You're right, American nuclear weapons would not be used to retaliate against a terrorist nuclear attack, unless we could prove that a country gave or sold the nuclear weapon to the terrorists deliberately.

American nuclear weapons are there to deter against nuclear attacks from other nuclear powers.



1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mac Mcleod
United States
houston
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
DaviddesJ wrote:
Just to add some facts to this exchange, US policy is NOT to commit to No First Use of nuclear weapons. I.e., it is official US policy that we might under some circumstances use nuclear weapons to preempt a threatened nuclear attack, or destroy other weapons of mass destruction that might be or might already have been used against the US or our allies. However, the policy states:

The United States will not use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapons states that are party to the NPT and in compliance with their nuclear non-proliferation obligations.

and therefore a US response to even large-scale attacks with weapons of mass destruction by non-nuclear states would be limited to conventional weapons.


Is this also true in the european theatre? I thought our police was tac nukes okay there against russian invasion.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
maxo-texas wrote:
DaviddesJ wrote:
However, the policy states:

The United States will not use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapons states that are party to the NPT and in compliance with their nuclear non-proliferation obligations.

and therefore a US response to even large-scale attacks with weapons of mass destruction by non-nuclear states would be limited to conventional weapons.


Is this also true in the european theatre? I thought our police was tac nukes okay there against russian invasion.


Russia is not a non-nuclear weapons state.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mac Mcleod
United States
houston
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
DaviddesJ wrote:
maxo-texas wrote:
DaviddesJ wrote:
However, the policy states:

The United States will not use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapons states that are party to the NPT and in compliance with their nuclear non-proliferation obligations.

and therefore a US response to even large-scale attacks with weapons of mass destruction by non-nuclear states would be limited to conventional weapons.


Is this also true in the european theatre? I thought our police was tac nukes okay there against russian invasion.


Russia is not a non-nuclear weapons state.


Ah- okay I understand. However, only countries with nuclear missiles would be capable of physically invading the united states by naval invasion. But I can see countries like Iraq can field large conventional forces on the ground (albeit woefully equipped and trained compared to chinese , soviet, european, and u.s. troops).

I'm not sure how well the doctrine would stand if 50 years from now a united south american army of well equipped well trained soldiers 500,000 strong was walking thru mexico on the way to the united states. But that's very hypothetical.

And it looks like putin and russia are up to some scary stuff.

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2015/12/nuclear-det...

Tho it is the heritage foundation so... "caveats".
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.