WARNING: This is Version 1 of my old archive, so Photos will NOT work and many links will NOT work. But you can find articles by searching on the Titles. There is a lot of information in this archive. Use the SEARCH BAR at the top right. Prior to December 2012; I was a pro-Christian type of Conservative. I was unaware of the mass of Jewish lies in history, especially the lies regarding WW2 and Hitler. So in here you will find pro-Jewish and pro-Israel material. I was definitely WRONG about the Boeremag and Janusz Walus. They were for real.
Original Post Date: 2007-01-05 Time: 00:00:00 Posted By: Jan
[I think nuclear proliferation is really no big deal at all. A good friend sent me this, and here are my comments.
Firstly, its a little bit hypocritical of the USA to want to stop small nations from getting nukes when the major nations already have them with Russia, the USA and China having the biggest arsenals.
Nuclear technology is here to stay. Whether it takes 2 years, 20 years, 200 or 2000 years… EVERYBODY is eventually going to get hold of nuclear weapons. Every country on earth, every rat hole, is going to get nuclear technology – if not now, then in future generations.
But I don’t think nuclear weapons are such a problem – let me tell you why.
Who are the ones going after nukes? Its all the 3rd world scum who can’t fight a war openly and conventionally and win that way. That’s who. Its the weak and the useless going after nukes. Now, they suck at conventional war so now they want nukes. Guess what, they’re gonna suck even more with nukes. Sure, nukes will pack a punch. But guess what… in a world where people can COMPETE and can hit back… let’s see them take the COUNTER PUNCH!!!
They might hit an enemy with a nuke or two – but what if the enemy has 10 or 20 flying back at them?
Let me give you an example. Suppose Iran develops a nuclear missile capable of hitting France or Germany (which by the way it will soon have). Its real simple, the French send their ambassador over to Iran and tell them: “It’s cool, you can nuke us if you wish, but if you fire so much as one missile at us, we will unleash our entire nuclear, chemical and biological warfare arsenal all over you… we will eradicate you and your children from the face of the earth, and we will seize all of what remains of Iran as a new province of France. We will kill any survivors among you and there will be a new and extended France in what used to be Iran and Tehran will be renamed as ‘Little Paris’ – oh, and by the way, we will *NEVER* return so much as one grain of sand to you! Have a nice day!”
Let me tell you, Iran won’t exactly be too keen to deal with something like that. Just make it clear to them, fire a missile, and even if our ABM systems shoot it down, we’re gonna come over there, and screw you over like you’ve never known in the last 3,000 years. And trust me, they’ll go looking for softer targets.
All these loser Arab nations who want nuclear weapons are all themselves rat holes and they’ve all had their butts kicked several times by tiny Israel. The USA really does not need to worry about Arab nuclear proliferation. They could have left Israel alone – and Israel would be blowing up their labs and preparing their own nukes to flatten the Arabs. I’m quite sure Israel is capable of telling ALL the Muslim nations, “Ahem, if you so much as try to make a move on us, by the end of the week EACH of your capital cities will be a smoking radioactive ruin”.
The reason the USA and West are so worried about nukes is because of their Liberal strategy. Honestly, they’re helping to create terrorists. These Arab nations see that by striving for nukes it now has the West in a frenzy and the West is coming up with all sorts of special deals, negotiations, etc and it gives these Arab assholes a sense of power. But in reality… all they need to be told and shown clearly is that if they try their luck, then they’ll be dealt with in an even harsher way than during the 6 day war.
Frankly, I think the Western world, led by the USA has engaged in a very bad strategy during wars of giving back conquered land. I think the Arabs should be told in no uncertain terms, that using nukes will result in any future conquests of them being PERMANENT, and if need be, they’ll be slaughtered to a man – and they will very quickly learn to shut the hell up. If they try their nuclear nonsense, then Israel or the West can attack, conquer and KEEP the land and shoot any remaining Arabs on it. Then there won’t be any guerilla warfare and there won’t be any future nuclear attacks. One idiot may try it… that fool will get solidly knocked to hell and back, and the rest will learn to shut the hell up.
I think the USA and the West are wasting their time trying to stop nuclear proliferation and they should simply make it clear to anyone who wants to use nukes that in return, nukes will be coming back at THEM! And, if it is a terrorist group that develops nukes, then all the countries assisting them will suffer conquest.
What everybody is missing here is an ancient truth. In ancient times people conquered and once they conquered they killed any opposition and they took total control. DOMINANCE was practised at the end of a sword. If you were defeated in conventional battle and you then continued resistance when your armies were defeated – then the enemy would simply slaughter your people (since you have no viable armies to defend them with). This is how the convention developed whereby defeat in battle leads to surrender BEFORE it leads to GENOCIDE!
But all these terrorists don’t have viable armies – ergo – they can be threatened with TOTAL CONQUEST and TOTAL ANNIHILATION in return – and it is very doable and very possible. Imagine if the USA turned Iraq into what, the 52nd (or would it be the 53rd) American state? In reality, it really is possible if America wanted it.
Terrorism did not exist in ancient times because of the retribution factor. But these days, “civilisation” and the softness thereof actually allows terrorists to exist when in fact, they’re not really a valid military threat.
Let’s say terrorists manage to get 5 nukes together… Remember, S.Africa, which at one time was the 18th biggest trading nation in the world, only had 6 low-yield nuclear bombs. So how many nukes do you think terrorists could get together? Not many I assure you. Even if all the terrorists in the world assembled 5 nukes… what could they do? Nuke 5 major cities? And? Would it bring any particular country to a standstill? Do you think that terrorists, who struggle to plant even conventional bombs could, for example, successfully smuggle in and detonate, say 5 nukes in – let’s say, Itay? I don’t think so. Even if they were awesomely lucky and detonated 3 – would Italy cease to exist? NO! Even if terrorists were to detonate 100 nuclear bombs on American soil next week – would the USA cease to exist? NO – not by a long shot.
But it would motivate that country to go and smoke out the terrorists and kill them all, and perhap invade and destroy their sponsors.
I think people make more of terrorism than its worth. I say: Kill the terrorists in their bases; then invade and conquer the countries who house them. If those countries are too difficult to conquer then invade and take what is in your best interests. e.g. Iran – the oil is in the south in flat lands. One of our AfricanCrisis readers suggested invading the south western portion of Iran where all the oil is, take it and keep it! Simple! Deprive Iran of its main asset, use it for yourself, never give it back. If they want it, they can try fighting you for it at a disadvantage.
I honestly don’t think, in a SANE WORLD that nuclear proliferation is a big deal. People will NOT wildly use nukes if the payback is total annihilation. Everyone will have nukes but they will almost never be used. People had poison gas – but apart from World War I, nobody has used poison gas again. The same could happen with nukes. Everyone has them, but almost nobody ever uses them. Jan]
US defense experts calls for world without nukes
By ASSOCIATED PRESS
Four prominent US defense experts said Thursday the United States could make a “vital contribution” toward ending a growing nuclear proliferation threat by working with other countries toward creating “a world without nuclear weapons.”
Reliance on nuclear weapons as a deterrent “is becoming increasingly hazardous and decreasingly effective,” the bi-partisan group said in a commentary.
The essay was written by former secretaries of state Henry A. Kissinger and George P. Shultz, former Defense Secretary William Perry and former Senate Armed Service Committee Chairman Sam Nunn.