CrackerJax
New Member
Boy, you sure have your head in the sand (Iranian? )don't you? 
out.
out.
Iran Update...
- Thread starter CrackerJax
- Start date
P
PadawanBater
Guest
Man, fuck these pointless efforts. You couldn't be a bigger waste of time. I've spent a lot of my time in this thread trying to talk some sense into you the best way I can, a few other people have as well, and all you ever come back with is bullshit like this.Boy, you sure have your head in the sand (Iranian? )don't you?
out.
You remind me of a creationist. Someone so goddamn hard headed and sure of themselves in every single way possible, someone who could never be wrong about anything, or at least admit when they're wrong. There's nothing wrong with being wrong about something CJ, but there is something wrong with being so sure that you're right that there's no way you could ever possibly be wrong about it.
A summary of this thread is as follows;
You say something totally unrealistic, biased, with no evidence to support it or back it up, I go look up the shit you say to confirm anything before I come back and respond to you so I don't look as retarded as a person who just spits out anything as if it's a fact, I cite sources and show you exactly where you're wrong, point by point, every time. You come back with blank statements that have nothing to do with the previous interaction, never address my points, and the story gets crazier and crazier with every post you make. I ask myself "why the fuck do I keep coming back to this thread, there's zero middle ground to be had with this guy!", but then I realize, you can vote, you're an American citizen, so on a small level, you do actually affect the current situation. Not only that, you come on public forums on the internet where any gullible retard can read what you post and get infected with the poison you continuously spout. (Max is a perfect example of this) You see peace as appeasement and weakness, you see no diplomatic resolution to any possible problem, you think you're smarter than the smartest world leaders, you think nations this country defines as terrorist should be oppressed out of existence because their people or leaders simply have a different way of doing shit, you want "American morals and values" (whatever the fuck that is) to spread across the planet, you think Americans are better than everyone else, you disregard history and never learn from it...
I'm fuckin' out bitch.
Woomeister
Well-Known Member
For the last 50 years, for most Pakistanis’ America has been the land of opportunity where dreams can come true. Thousands of Pakistani’s have made their way, many illegally, to the US in search of the American dream. While only a few hundred thousand succeeded, 10’s of millions aspire to do, and with a population of 145 million, that’s probably more than half the country!
A large number who make it to America end up being taxi drivers, burger flippers, newspaper delivery boys and working the night shift at 7-11’s. Still, a sizeable percentage makes it to the good life, and even those working at the bottom have a chance to work their way up the ladder.
All over the web, this seems to be what many think of Pakistan:
Pakistan was known for being a helping-hand if you were a third-world would be proliferator, or a terrorist that needed a madrassa…
The US heavily supported Pakistan and Afghanistan during the Soviet/Afghan war, and dumped both countries like hot cakes afterwards. That support directly led to the rise of fundamentalism in Pakistan as the CIA/US set up thousands of madrasas all over the country to train ‘freedom fighters’ for the war. Before the CIA jumped in, Pakistan was a fairly liberal country, and a very pro-western one to boot. The thousands of madrassahs are still there churning out tens of thousands every year. This is what directly led to the rise of fundamentalism here, and the vast spread of drug use in Pakistan. This is just one reason that America is the cause of the 'so called' terrorist problems.
A large number who make it to America end up being taxi drivers, burger flippers, newspaper delivery boys and working the night shift at 7-11’s. Still, a sizeable percentage makes it to the good life, and even those working at the bottom have a chance to work their way up the ladder.
All over the web, this seems to be what many think of Pakistan:
Pakistan was known for being a helping-hand if you were a third-world would be proliferator, or a terrorist that needed a madrassa…
The US heavily supported Pakistan and Afghanistan during the Soviet/Afghan war, and dumped both countries like hot cakes afterwards. That support directly led to the rise of fundamentalism in Pakistan as the CIA/US set up thousands of madrasas all over the country to train ‘freedom fighters’ for the war. Before the CIA jumped in, Pakistan was a fairly liberal country, and a very pro-western one to boot. The thousands of madrassahs are still there churning out tens of thousands every year. This is what directly led to the rise of fundamentalism here, and the vast spread of drug use in Pakistan. This is just one reason that America is the cause of the 'so called' terrorist problems.
Jointsmith
Well-Known Member
CJ, its fucking funny that you never link to your sources.
You don't even want us to see what website you lifted that ignorant shit from, let alone THEIR sources.
Everyone else leaves links to sources, that usually have links to THEIR sources, THAT is how you review legitimate information.
Actually CJ has me on ignor because of our differing opinions, how mature. lol
You don't even want us to see what website you lifted that ignorant shit from, let alone THEIR sources.
Everyone else leaves links to sources, that usually have links to THEIR sources, THAT is how you review legitimate information.
Actually CJ has me on ignor because of our differing opinions, how mature. lol
admins change and policys change.
obongo is a new admin,a new pres with new policy .seems alot of jews i know think he is a muslim manchurian candidate.i think so also.why? because everyone of his actions he has taken since he has been in office has been a direct attack on the economy of the USA.WITHOUT exeption .there for he must be doing it on purpose,
this man is either dumber than jimmy carter dumb or he is doing it on purpose,
im sure carter is thanking god someone come along a worse president than him.now he doesnt have to go down in the history books as the biggest american jack ass president ever.
TheBrutalTruth
Well-Known Member
If the Iranians Nuke DC, they'll be going us a favor, hopefully they'll get all the politicians.Speaking of Russians, here's a breath of fresh air which is rare from over there (rhymes
Iran: A Russian general has issued a public warning about the dangers posed by the Islamist regime in Tehran. Is further confirmation needed to convince the West that the dithering United Nations isn't the answer?
Maj. Gen. Vladimir Dvorkin, speaking at a Russian press agency news conference Thursday, corroborated intelligence that Iran is developing a next-generation, long-range missile and has dangerous nuclear weapons ambitions. Dvorkin, who heads Moscow's Center for Strategic Nuclear Forces, said, "Iran has long abandoned outdated missile technologies and is capable of producing sophisticated missile systems."
Dvorkin doesn't believe Iran is capable yet of building an intercontinental ballistic missile that can carry a nuclear warhead, "but they will most likely be able to threaten the whole of Europe."
Iran has made a mockery of the U.N.'s demands that it halt its nuclear program, which could produce an atomic weapon next year if not sooner. Its belligerence will only grow more outrageous after it has built a nuclear weapon that it can use "to expand its support of terrorist organizations, including Hamas and Hezbollah," Dvorkin said. Nuclear capability will give it the leverage it needs to try to dominate the entire Middle East.
Dvorkin doesn't strike us as a crank out to trouble the waters. He spent much of his career deeply involved in strategic arms talks, helping the Soviet Union draw up its positions on a number of weapons pacts. His warning is not only for the West, but directed toward Russia as well. He is getting a message that many in the U.S. and Europe are too timid to listen to.
Iran is not some "tiny" country that doesn't "pose a serious threat to us," as one of the presidential candidates said last May. While it's not the new USSR, it is, as that same candidate said two months later, "a grave threat," which the world must keep from getting a nuclear weapon.
Barack Obama vowed in July that he would "take no options off the table" in dealing with Iran. He also said he'd be willing to talk to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Now that Obama's president, we'd rather he take the latter idea off the table, as meeting with Ahmadinejad would only encourage more hostility. Ahmadinejad himself said Obama's offer to talk showed weakness and marked a "failure" of America's "system of domination."
What's needed in dealing with Iran is strength and a thick skin while facing the Western nations that will wag their fingers at any show of U.S. strength or resolve. Given Dvorkin's comments, it's possible that Washington might even find an ally in Moscow.
Notice how he refers to Iran as a regime Paddy? Hmmm.
out.
Jointsmith
Well-Known Member
CrackerJax
New Member
Paddy, you sir are the one being unrealistic. The rest of the world seems to get it. So fill me in...what great portent of knowledge do you possess alone that all of the worlds intelligence agencies don't? You are at odds with your own president .... You somehow are even able to ignore the words of the Iranian leaders themselves...wow.
You seem to think it is okay that Iran gets the bomb. Clearly naive. No one else does. I guess that makes you special...
TBT: I know you are joking If I had to decide a first primary target for an EMP or full impact detonation, I'm going to lean towards London. It's still a financial conglomerate representing the western powers. It's closer, and they have no defenses and are wide open to an attack. 
out.
You seem to think it is okay that Iran gets the bomb. Clearly naive. No one else does. I guess that makes you special...
TBT: I know you are joking
If I had to decide a first primary target for an EMP or full impact detonation, I'm going to lean towards London. It's still a financial conglomerate representing the western powers. It's closer, and they have no defenses and are wide open to an attack. 
out.
TheBrutalTruth
Well-Known Member
About Iran doing us a favor by nuking DC, not at all...Paddy, you sir are the one being unrealistic. The rest of the world seems to get it. So fill me in...what great portent of knowledge do you possess alone that all of the worlds intelligence agencies don't? You are at odds with your own president .... You somehow are even able to ignore the words of the Iranian leaders themselves...wow.
You seem to think it is okay that Iran gets the bomb. Clearly naive. No one else does. I guess that makes you special...
TBT: I know you are joking
out.
I'm dead serious about it.
Do I really want it to happen. No, too much collateral damage.
Though, yeah, London would make a good target, too.
As long as the blast was focused around the Bank of England.
CrackerJax
New Member
I'm still betting on an EMP bomb. It would be nearly impossible to retaliate, since there would be no loss of life and their tests have been indicating half arc deliveries.
out.
out.
Woomeister
Well-Known Member
I think the fact that we could (the British) nuke any country that threatens us and witholds the right to a pre-emptive strike if threatened enough, is defense enough. 100 kiloton warheads are a defense.Paddy, you sir are the one being unrealistic. The rest of the world seems to get it. So fill me in...what great portent of knowledge do you possess alone that all of the worlds intelligence agencies don't? You are at odds with your own president .... You somehow are even able to ignore the words of the Iranian leaders themselves...wow.
You seem to think it is okay that Iran gets the bomb. Clearly naive. No one else does. I guess that makes you special...
TBT: I know you are joking
out.
suedonimn
Well-Known Member
Neutron bomb
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A neutron bomb, technically referred to as an enhanced radiation weapon (ERW), is a type of tactical nuclear weapon formerly built mainly by the United States specifically to release a large portion of its energy as energetic neutron radiation. This contrasts with standard thermonuclear weapons, which are designed to capture this intense neutron radiation to increase its overall explosive yield. In terms of yield, ERWs typically produce about one-tenth that of most fission-type atomic weapons.[1] Even with their significantly lower explosive power, ERWs are still capable of much greater destruction than any conventional bomb. Meanwhile, relative to other nuclear weapons, damage is more focused on biological material than on material infrastructure (though extreme blast and heat effects are not eliminatedsee Technical overview below).
Conception of the neutron bomb is generally credited to Samuel Cohen of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, who developed the concept in 1958. Although initially opposed by President John F. Kennedy, its testing was authorized and carried out in 1963 at an underground Nevada test facility.[2] Development was subsequently postponed by President Jimmy Carter in 1978 following protests against his administration's plans to deploy neutron warheads in Europe. President Ronald Reagan restarted production in 1981.[3]
Three types of ERW were built by the United States.[4] The W66 warhead, for the anti-ICBM Sprint missile system, was produced and deployed in the mid 1970s and retired soon thereafter, along with the missile system. The W70 Mod 3 warhead was developed for the short-range, tactical Lance missile, and the W79 Mod 0 was developed for artillery shells. The latter two types were retired by President George H. W. Bush in 1992, following the end of the Cold War.[5][6] The last W70 Mod 3 warhead was dismantled in 1996[7], and the last (W79 Mod 0) was dismantled by 2003, when the dismantling of all W79 variants was completed.[8].
France tested a neutron bomb at the Mururoa Atoll on June 24, 1980. Enhanced radiation weapons were also produced by France in the early 1980s, though they have since destroyed these weapons. The 1999 "Cox Report" indicates that China is able to produce neutron bombs[9], although no country is currently known to deploy them.
Technical overview
An ERW is a fission-fusion thermonuclear weapon in which the burst of neutrons generated by a fusion reaction is intentionally allowed to escape the weapon, rather than being absorbed by its other components. The weapon's X-ray mirrors and shell are made of chromium or nickel so that the neutrons can escape. Contrast this with cobalt bombs, also known as salted bombs.
Neutron bombs have low explosive yields compared with other nuclear weapons. This is because neutrons are absorbed by air, so a high-yield neutron bomb is not able to radiate neutrons beyond its blast range and so would have no destructive advantage over a normal hydrogen bomb. Note that using the explosive yield of ERWs to measure destructive power can be deceptive: most of the injuries caused by an ERW would come from ionizing radiation, not from heat and blast.
This intense burst of high-energy neutrons is intended as the principal killing mechanism, although large amounts of heat and blast are also produced. Although neutron bombs are commonly believed to "leave the infrastructure intact", current designs have explosive yields in the kiloton range,[10], the detonation of which would cause heavy destruction through blast and heat effects. A yield of one kiloton is not high for a nuclear weapon, but is still nearly two orders of magnitude (100 times) bigger than the most powerful conventional bombs.
One of the uses for which this weapon was conceived is large-scale anti-tank weaponry. Armored vehicles offer a relatively high degree of protection against heat and blast, the primary destructive mechanisms of normal nuclear weapons. That is, military personnel inside a tank can be expected to survive a nuclear explosion at relatively close range, while the vehicle's NBC protection systems ensure a high degree of operability even in a nuclear fallout environment. By contrast, ER weapons are meant to kill a much higher percentage of enemy personnel inside such protected environments through the release of a higher percentage of their yield in the form of neutron radiation, against which even tank armor is not very effective.
The term enhanced radiation refers only to the burst of neutron radiation released at the moment of detonation, not to any enhancement of residual radiation in fallout.
A neutron bomb requires considerable amounts of tritium, which has a half-life of approximately 12.32 years,[11] compounding the difficulties of extended storage. For a weapon to remain effective over time, tritium components would have to be periodically replaced.
Neutron bomb tactics
Neutron bombs could be used as strategic anti-ballistic missile weapons or as tactical weapons intended for use against armored forces; in fact, the neutron bomb was originally conceived as a weapon that could stop Soviet armored divisions from overrunning Western Europe without destroying Western Europe in the process.
As an anti-ballistic missile weapon, an ER warhead was developed for the Sprint missile system as part of the Safeguard Program to protect United States cities and missile silos from incoming Soviet warheads by damaging their electronic components with the intense neutron flux.
Tactical neutron bombs are primarily intended to kill soldiers who are protected by armor. Armored vehicles are extremely resistant to blast and heat produced by nuclear weapons, so the effective range of a nuclear weapon against tanks is determined by the lethal range of the radiation, although this is also reduced by the armor. By emitting large amounts of lethal radiation of the most penetrating kind, ER warheads maximize the lethal range of a given yield of nuclear warhead against armored targets.
One problem with using radiation as a tactical anti-personnel weapon is that to bring about rapid death of the individuals targeted, a radiation dose that is many times the lethal level must be administered. A radiation dose of 6 Gy is normally considered lethal. It will kill at least half of those who are exposed to it, but no effect is noticeable for several hours. Neutron bombs were intended to deliver a dose of 80 Gy to quickly kill targets. A 1 kt ER warhead can do this to a T-72 tank crew at a range of 690 m, compared to 360 m for a pure fission bomb. For a 6 Gy dose, the distances are 1100 m and 700 m respectively, and for unprotected soldiers 6 Gy exposures occur at 1350 m and 900 m. The lethal range for tactical neutron bombs exceeds the lethal range for blast and heat even for unprotected troops, which is likely the reasoning for the idea that a neutron bomb destroys life and not infrastructure. If a neutron bomb were detonated at the correct altitude, deadly levels of radiation would blanket a wide area with minimal heat and blast effects when compared to a nuclear weapon of conventional design.
The neutron flux can induce significant amounts of short-lived secondary radioactivity in the environment in the high flux region near the burst point. The alloys used in steel armor can develop radioactivity that is dangerous for 24-48 hours. If a tank exposed to a 1 kt neutron bomb at 690 m (the effective range for immediate crew incapacitation) is immediately occupied by a new crew, they will receive a lethal dose of radiation within 24 hours.
One significant drawback of the weapon is that not all targeted troops will die or be incapacitated immediately. After a brief bout of nausea, many of those hit with about 5-50 Sv of radiation will experience a temporary recovery (the latent or "walking ghost phase"[12]) lasting days to weeks. Moreover, these victims would likely be aware of their inevitable fate and react accordingly.
This is probably the type of weapon that will be used in the middle east. If you are familiar with certain prophecies, this type of weapon, seems to best fit the description(Revelation). Total annihilation of all biological life, with minimal effects on property and material objects. Almost no fallout, make readily available CHEAP real estate. How that for redistribution of wealth.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A neutron bomb, technically referred to as an enhanced radiation weapon (ERW), is a type of tactical nuclear weapon formerly built mainly by the United States specifically to release a large portion of its energy as energetic neutron radiation. This contrasts with standard thermonuclear weapons, which are designed to capture this intense neutron radiation to increase its overall explosive yield. In terms of yield, ERWs typically produce about one-tenth that of most fission-type atomic weapons.[1] Even with their significantly lower explosive power, ERWs are still capable of much greater destruction than any conventional bomb. Meanwhile, relative to other nuclear weapons, damage is more focused on biological material than on material infrastructure (though extreme blast and heat effects are not eliminatedsee Technical overview below).
- History
Conception of the neutron bomb is generally credited to Samuel Cohen of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, who developed the concept in 1958. Although initially opposed by President John F. Kennedy, its testing was authorized and carried out in 1963 at an underground Nevada test facility.[2] Development was subsequently postponed by President Jimmy Carter in 1978 following protests against his administration's plans to deploy neutron warheads in Europe. President Ronald Reagan restarted production in 1981.[3]
Three types of ERW were built by the United States.[4] The W66 warhead, for the anti-ICBM Sprint missile system, was produced and deployed in the mid 1970s and retired soon thereafter, along with the missile system. The W70 Mod 3 warhead was developed for the short-range, tactical Lance missile, and the W79 Mod 0 was developed for artillery shells. The latter two types were retired by President George H. W. Bush in 1992, following the end of the Cold War.[5][6] The last W70 Mod 3 warhead was dismantled in 1996[7], and the last (W79 Mod 0) was dismantled by 2003, when the dismantling of all W79 variants was completed.[8].
France tested a neutron bomb at the Mururoa Atoll on June 24, 1980. Enhanced radiation weapons were also produced by France in the early 1980s, though they have since destroyed these weapons. The 1999 "Cox Report" indicates that China is able to produce neutron bombs[9], although no country is currently known to deploy them.
Technical overview
An ERW is a fission-fusion thermonuclear weapon in which the burst of neutrons generated by a fusion reaction is intentionally allowed to escape the weapon, rather than being absorbed by its other components. The weapon's X-ray mirrors and shell are made of chromium or nickel so that the neutrons can escape. Contrast this with cobalt bombs, also known as salted bombs.
Neutron bombs have low explosive yields compared with other nuclear weapons. This is because neutrons are absorbed by air, so a high-yield neutron bomb is not able to radiate neutrons beyond its blast range and so would have no destructive advantage over a normal hydrogen bomb. Note that using the explosive yield of ERWs to measure destructive power can be deceptive: most of the injuries caused by an ERW would come from ionizing radiation, not from heat and blast.
This intense burst of high-energy neutrons is intended as the principal killing mechanism, although large amounts of heat and blast are also produced. Although neutron bombs are commonly believed to "leave the infrastructure intact", current designs have explosive yields in the kiloton range,[10], the detonation of which would cause heavy destruction through blast and heat effects. A yield of one kiloton is not high for a nuclear weapon, but is still nearly two orders of magnitude (100 times) bigger than the most powerful conventional bombs.
One of the uses for which this weapon was conceived is large-scale anti-tank weaponry. Armored vehicles offer a relatively high degree of protection against heat and blast, the primary destructive mechanisms of normal nuclear weapons. That is, military personnel inside a tank can be expected to survive a nuclear explosion at relatively close range, while the vehicle's NBC protection systems ensure a high degree of operability even in a nuclear fallout environment. By contrast, ER weapons are meant to kill a much higher percentage of enemy personnel inside such protected environments through the release of a higher percentage of their yield in the form of neutron radiation, against which even tank armor is not very effective.
The term enhanced radiation refers only to the burst of neutron radiation released at the moment of detonation, not to any enhancement of residual radiation in fallout.
A neutron bomb requires considerable amounts of tritium, which has a half-life of approximately 12.32 years,[11] compounding the difficulties of extended storage. For a weapon to remain effective over time, tritium components would have to be periodically replaced.
Neutron bomb tactics
Neutron bombs could be used as strategic anti-ballistic missile weapons or as tactical weapons intended for use against armored forces; in fact, the neutron bomb was originally conceived as a weapon that could stop Soviet armored divisions from overrunning Western Europe without destroying Western Europe in the process.
As an anti-ballistic missile weapon, an ER warhead was developed for the Sprint missile system as part of the Safeguard Program to protect United States cities and missile silos from incoming Soviet warheads by damaging their electronic components with the intense neutron flux.
Tactical neutron bombs are primarily intended to kill soldiers who are protected by armor. Armored vehicles are extremely resistant to blast and heat produced by nuclear weapons, so the effective range of a nuclear weapon against tanks is determined by the lethal range of the radiation, although this is also reduced by the armor. By emitting large amounts of lethal radiation of the most penetrating kind, ER warheads maximize the lethal range of a given yield of nuclear warhead against armored targets.
One problem with using radiation as a tactical anti-personnel weapon is that to bring about rapid death of the individuals targeted, a radiation dose that is many times the lethal level must be administered. A radiation dose of 6 Gy is normally considered lethal. It will kill at least half of those who are exposed to it, but no effect is noticeable for several hours. Neutron bombs were intended to deliver a dose of 80 Gy to quickly kill targets. A 1 kt ER warhead can do this to a T-72 tank crew at a range of 690 m, compared to 360 m for a pure fission bomb. For a 6 Gy dose, the distances are 1100 m and 700 m respectively, and for unprotected soldiers 6 Gy exposures occur at 1350 m and 900 m. The lethal range for tactical neutron bombs exceeds the lethal range for blast and heat even for unprotected troops, which is likely the reasoning for the idea that a neutron bomb destroys life and not infrastructure. If a neutron bomb were detonated at the correct altitude, deadly levels of radiation would blanket a wide area with minimal heat and blast effects when compared to a nuclear weapon of conventional design.
The neutron flux can induce significant amounts of short-lived secondary radioactivity in the environment in the high flux region near the burst point. The alloys used in steel armor can develop radioactivity that is dangerous for 24-48 hours. If a tank exposed to a 1 kt neutron bomb at 690 m (the effective range for immediate crew incapacitation) is immediately occupied by a new crew, they will receive a lethal dose of radiation within 24 hours.
One significant drawback of the weapon is that not all targeted troops will die or be incapacitated immediately. After a brief bout of nausea, many of those hit with about 5-50 Sv of radiation will experience a temporary recovery (the latent or "walking ghost phase"[12]) lasting days to weeks. Moreover, these victims would likely be aware of their inevitable fate and react accordingly.
This is probably the type of weapon that will be used in the middle east. If you are familiar with certain prophecies, this type of weapon, seems to best fit the description(Revelation). Total annihilation of all biological life, with minimal effects on property and material objects. Almost no fallout, make readily available CHEAP real estate. How that for redistribution of wealth.
Jointsmith
Well-Known Member
Quite right, we have 4 Trident Nuclear Subs able to strike anywhere on the globe at anytime.....I think the fact that we could (the British) nuke any country that threatens us and witholds the right to a pre-emptive strike if threatened enough, is defense enough. 100 kiloton warheads are a defense.
We need US protection?....bwahaha!
CrackerJackass makes the USA Sound like a protection raquet!.... if we don't pay, the states they might come around and smash our shit up.... lol.
I'm quaking in my size 14 boots.
Jointsmith
Well-Known Member
CrackerJax
New Member
I am quite aware of the brit's having nuke capability. We were the supplier of them to you.I think the fact that we could (the British) nuke any country that threatens us and witholds the right to a pre-emptive strike if threatened enough, is defense enough. 100 kiloton warheads are a defense.
What you do NOT have is a missile defense system. Which means you will have to absorb a nuke first. I'm sorry, how big is your isle? With a single nuke detonation, England will be gone, or would wish to not continue. That's a defense, but not a viable defense.
out.
Woomeister
Well-Known Member
Such a predictable answer! The whole point of having nuclear missile defense systems is a waste of time and money. If a country such as Russia decided it were to attack America you really think you could stop each and every missile? No you would'nt, fact! The MAD theory is what has kept the world from nuclear war up till now and will hopefully do so for as long as possible. You childish comments are exactly that, the Uk is tiny but look how proportionally powerful it actually is, look how proportionally rich it is. You pathetic diatribe does nothing to help your arguement and does everything to incite hatred. Also you would have to hit The Uk In all 4 corners with 100 kiloton bombs to destroy the possibility of future viabilty of the country, so get your facts right. 'We were the supplier of them to you' another pathetic childish comment, arent you the best for supplying wmds to countrys. The British and French have had there own Neutron capabilities since the 80's and lead the world in civilian nuclear power technology now- fact. If I were to list the inventions that my small, weak, undefended isle has developed and rolled out to the world then I would be here all day. Oh yes and thanks for exporting the sub-prime disaster that has brought the world to its kneesI am quite aware of the brit's having nuke capability. We were the supplier of them to you.
What you do NOT have is a missile defense system. Which means you will have to absorb a nuke first. I'm sorry, how big is your isle? With a single nuke detonation, England will be gone, or would wish to not continue. That's a defense, but not a viable defense.
out.
where would we be without that? China will be THE superpower in 20 years whether you like it or not, and India wont be far behind, deal with it. All the rhetoric wont help you then because unless the US changes its foreign policy you will become isolated. Which people like you want anyway, dont you? Iran is not going to bomb London or anywhere else for that matter, and you know how I know? Because America or Israel will bomb them first...sad but probably true.*** The UK has stockpiled enough plutonium to destroy everything on the face of the Earth. Israel and its allies, foremost of which are the US and UK, each have their own huge nuclear weapon stockpiles of literally apocalyptic proportions, enough to exterminate all life on the planet several times over. Yet they want you to believe that it is Iran you should be worried about. (Iran has no nuclear weapons.) ***
UK has plutonium for 17,000 bombs
The UK has built up a stockpile of 100 tonnes of plutonium - enough to make 17,000 nuclear bombs, according to the country's national academy of science.
P
PadawanBater
Guest
You, CJ, were not the supplier to anyone, why do you take credit for everyone elses work?
CrackerJax
New Member
Paddy, we, not I. Follow the bouncing words.
Woo, no one said the missile defense system was for Russia. It is a system for rogue nations with limited arsenals. You should follow the bouncing words as well.
out.
we, not I. Follow the bouncing words.Woo, no one said the missile defense system was for Russia. It is a system for rogue nations with limited arsenals. You should follow the bouncing words as well.
out.
Woomeister
Well-Known Member
It wont work against the suitcase bombs the Soviet union developed with 100 of the originally made 200 missing!!!
CrackerJax
New Member
That's true. I am in 100% agreement with you there. That is no reason to let Iran have the bomb however.
out.
out.