Ronald Reagan, and nuclear War

[bob10]

They were told to expect 80 million American casualties.

Ronald Reagan and Nuclear War: The SIOP Briefing and IVY League 82 (http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/nukevault/ebb575-Reagan-Nuclear-War-Briefing/)

[bob10]

Jimmy Carter's controversial nuclear targeting directive.

Jimmy Carter's Controversial Nuclear Targeting Directive PD-59 Declassified (http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/nukevault/ebb390/)

[Tombie]

Paranoia at its finest... amazing it never got worse.

[bob10]

There is every indication it may.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/12/22/world/americas/trump-nuclear-tweet.html?_r=0

And Vladimir said.....

https://www.yahoo.com/news/putin-calls-strengthening-russias-military-nuclear-potential-101800687.html

[DiscoMick]

Nuclear weapons are a poor deterrent since each side knows if they use them the other side will retaliate massively and it's all over red rover.
Nuclear weapons can't be used in conventional battlefield conflicts, invasions or border disputes.
Modernising nuclear weapons can be justified as a way of maintaining the Mutually Assured Deterrent (MAD) arsenal, but basically they are redundant for actual conflicts.
In other words, they are a huge waste of money in most situations.

Sent from my A1601 using AULRO mobile app

[bob10]

The definition of catch 22.

https://youtu.be/msPO_vXaCTw

[Ausfree]

Nuclear weapons are a poor deterrent since each side knows if they use them the other side will retaliate massively and it's all over red rover.
Nuclear weapons can't be used in conventional battlefield conflicts, invasions or border disputes.
Modernising nuclear weapons can be justified as a way of maintaining the Mutually Assured Deterrent (MAD) arsenal, but basically they are redundant for actual conflicts.
In other words, they are a huge waste of money in most situations.

Sent from my A1601 using AULRO mobile app

That's all very well in the hands of reasonable people, but what if somebody like North Korea decides to up the ante. The big worry is, if a nuclear weapon falls into the hands of a terrorist who don't care about life.

[Tombie]

Mick.

MAD is Mutually Assured Destruction. Not deterrent.

[bob10]

Nuclear weapons are a poor deterrent since each side knows if they use them the other side will retaliate massively and it's all over red rover.
Nuclear weapons can't be used in conventional battlefield conflicts, invasions or border disputes.
Modernising nuclear weapons can be justified as a way of maintaining the Mutually Assured Deterrent (MAD) arsenal, but basically they are redundant for actual conflicts.
In other words, they are a huge waste of money in most situations.

Sent from my A1601 using AULRO mobile app


Read President Carters nuclear targeting directive.. Everything depends on which rat bag is in charge. Putin and Trump.Good luck with that.

[DiscoMick]

Mick.

MAD is Mutually Assured Destruction. Not deterrent.

That's right. MAD is supposed to be a deterrent.

Sent from my A1601 using AULRO mobile app

[Tombie]

I think they should just hit the buttons and see what Nuclear Winter looks like.

[bob10]

I think they should just hit the buttons and see what Nuclear Winter looks like.

I don't think you really mean that.

[DiscoMick]

I can guarantee you would not enjoy nuclear winter.

Sent from my A1601 using AULRO mobile app

[Tombie]

I can guarantee you would not enjoy nuclear winter.

Sent from my A1601 using AULRO mobile app



No you can't [emoji41]

Mankind is determined to wipe itself out of existence... only a matter of how.. and when...

[THE BOOGER]

I like how jurnos ask stupid questions untill they get a stupid answer then put it on the front page did anybody read the last bit of trumps tweet or is that not what we are supposed to think about;)

[bob10]

We should be careful what we wish for.Merry Xmas.

https://youtu.be/bgbDwBJPYdg

[THE BOOGER]

Why didnt we hear much about this when Pres Obama anounced it some time ago

https://theintercept.com/2016/02/23/obamas-new-rationale-for-1-trillion-nuclear-program-augurs-a-new-arms-race-with-russia/

[Tombie]

We should be careful what we wish for.Merry Xmas.



https://youtu.be/bgbDwBJPYdg



Excellent video. (I ignored the political doctrine)

[Tombie]

I can guarantee you would not enjoy nuclear winter.

Sent from my A1601 using AULRO mobile app



A Pyrocumulonimbus cloud event doesn't require bombs. Just firestorms... these have been seen from bush fires.

It's stunning theory and science.

[Pickles2]

I watched the video,..in full.
And until around the 8 minute mark I thought it was, well it was horrific, it made one think what such a nuclear holocaust would be like, and I was engrossed, until I heard the AMAZINGLY RIDICULOUS & NONSENSICAL WORDS,.."This is what Obama intends"!!!...That is simply bull****. NO-ONE wants that.
I note that the video, which certainly made me think, was made in 2012, by someone/some group, who was MOST DEFINITELY against the Obama administration, ......these words, (just before the 2012 election), "U.S. military strength is now just about at its peak, (the right time for a U.S. strike), and the right time to stop it (by voting against Obama!).
I note all the U.S. "deployments around the World. Russia has the same,..but no mention of that, and of course, we now have China "building & arming islands in the South China Sea"?....I ain't seen the U.S. doing anything like that. At the 33 min mark I hear more amazingly stupid stuff re Obama,..Leading a "Suicide Mission"??!!!...absolute rubbish.
However, at the 30 minute mark,...a word of truth, "A fool will come upon the scene"??...VERY TRUE,..something we would all worry about,....but it wasn't Obama (I actually thought He did Ok,..what do you guys think?), & it won't be Putin (Putin-Trump will be interesting),...but there are certainly several "Loonies" around who'd love the opportunity to destroy EVERYTHING. I'll leave you to decide who they might be.
Years ago when I was working, I used to drive to work, in the City, and for years, emblazoned in very large letters on a red brick wall, was painted "Peace Through Superior Firepower". Now I'm not saying that this "should" be true,...but isn't there a little bit of truth in it?
Simply IMHO of course, Pickles.
Oh, and by the way, google "Lyndon LaRouche", look at his "Political Roots", and then you may understand where some of the views of this video come from.

[bob10]

Ignore the politics. I did. That was a very accurate description of the consequences of nuclear War. Doesn't bear thinking about.

[bob10]

Why didnt we hear much about this when Pres Obama anounced it some time ago

https://theintercept.com/2016/02/23/obamas-new-rationale-for-1-trillion-nuclear-program-augurs-a-new-arms-race-with-russia/

It was widely reported in the US press. Made me feel sick in the stomach, really.

[Pickles2]

Ignore the politics. I did. That was a very accurate description of the consequences of nuclear War. Doesn't bear thinking about.
"?gnore the politics"?....I'd be delighted to,....on the condition that you stopped presenting blatantly "political" links,...which of course you are entitled to do, and to which, of course, I am equally entitled to respond.
This "link" presented frightening scenarios of which "blind freddie"would be aware,.....anyone who cares about humanity would be aware of these issues,...We do not need to listen, to what was blatantly, in your words, "Politics", and this was definitely "political". It wasn't even concealed.....it was a blatantly (repeatedly mentioned) an anti Obama (2012) article, & of course four years later, it has been proven to be 100% WRONG.
I couldn't help but laugh when the presenter spoke of JFK's "diplomacy"!!..with respect to the Cuban missiles. It was top stuff SPOKEN by the U.S. president at the time, I actually remember the broadcast, because it was live on Aussie radio, and Bob, if you are as old as I am, you would remember it?.... it was "diplomacy"at its best,....JFK's "diplomacy" was, as I remember, and as you probably do, "Remove them, or I will"!....Some people today would regard that response as agressive,....I regard it as correct.....the missiles were removed......very quickly.
Pickles.
Bob,I know we are on different "wave lengths", but whether you agree or not, I think a good discussion, is always good.

[bob10]

"?gnore the politics"?....I'd be delighted to,....on the condition that you stopped presenting blatantly "political" links,...which of course you are entitled to do, and to which, of course, I am equally entitled to respond.
This "link" presented frightening scenarios of which "blind freddie"would be aware,.....anyone who cares about humanity would be aware of these issues,...We do not need to listen, to what was blatantly, in your words, "Politics", and this was definitely "political". It wasn't even concealed.....it was a blatantly (repeatedly mentioned) an anti Obama (2012) article, & of course four years later, it has been proven to be 100% WRONG.
I couldn't help but laugh when the presenter spoke of JFK's "diplomacy"!!..with respect to the Cuban missiles. It was top stuff SPOKEN by the U.S. president at the time, I actually remember the broadcast, because it was live on Aussie radio, and Bob, if you are as old as I am, you would remember it?.... it was "diplomacy"at its best,....JFK's "diplomacy" was, as I remember, and as you probably do, "Remove them, or I will"!....Some people today would regard that response as agressive,....I regard it as correct.....the missiles were removed......very quickly.
Pickles.
Bob,I know we are on different "wave lengths", but whether you agree or not, I think a good discussion, is always good.

If I could separate the message from the politics, I would. Unfortunately, the way it was formatted it was not possible. The message is what should hold your attention, not the obvious political message. I consider myself mature enough to do that.

[ramblingboy42]

:thumbsup:peace man , peace :thumbsup:

[Pickles2]

If I could separate the message from the politics, I would. Unfortunately, the way it was formatted it was not possible. The message is what should hold your attention, not the obvious political message. I consider myself mature enough to do that.
I did MOST DEFINITELY get the message,.....and the frightening scenarios.
Like I said, it ain't the U.S., or Russia, or China, that we have to be concerned about,.....it is,........"THE LOONIES".
Am I afraid?...yes I am,.....VERY.....and I am VERY aware of the "scenarios".
Pickles.
A question for you Bob. Do you have any opinions as to what may be the World within the next 20 years?

[bob10]

As in every debate, there must be a right of reply.And before any one jumps in feet first, I am not a communist.

https://youtu.be/kqD8lIdIMRo

[bob10]

A question for you Bob. Do you have any opinions as to what may be the World within the next 20 years?

No more than my parents generation did . And the beat goes on.

[Tombie]

I did MOST DEFINITELY get the message,.....and the frightening scenarios.
Like I said, it ain't the U.S., or Russia, or China, that we have to be concerned about,.....it is,........"THE LOONIES".
Am I afraid?...yes I am,.....VERY.....and I am VERY aware of the "scenarios".
Pickles.
A question for you Bob. Do you have any opinions as to what may be the World within the next 20 years?



Interestingly China considers the US a bit "looney"

Their armament in recent years is directly built upon technology such as missiles whose entire purpose is destruction of Aircraft Carriers with a single missile.. DF-21D

This has the Yanks sweating as it has no other purpose.

Their steal drones, anti-satellite shuttles and other tech has skipped 3 generations of tech in the last decade. The Americans are on "catch up" at the moment to remain the world power..

[Homestar]

Ok, I'm closing this for the time being as ( a ) I think this is political and it has been reported, and ( b ) Pickles and Bob have made it personal - again. I'll discuss this with the other Mods and it may be reopened later after some pruning, etc. Given the time of year it may take a few days.