U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Do you support Warren's proposal that we first have to be attacked with nukes before we can use them
Yes, we should announce to the world we won't use a nuke until one is first used on us 31 27.93%
No, we shouldn't handcuff ourselves saying a city first has to be destroyed before we can use our most powerful weapons 80 72.07%
Voters: 111. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-03-2019, 09:51 PM
 
Location: US
18,325 posts, read 18,094,191 times
Reputation: 14247

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by James Bond 007 View Post
Meh, I can't ever imagine a scenario where the ONLY option to make some sort of threat would be with nuclear weapons. If somebody is posing a grave danger to us, there are many other options other than to launch nukes at them.

Isn't our largest bomb smaller than Russia's largest bomb?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-03-2019, 09:53 PM
 
Location: US
18,325 posts, read 18,094,191 times
Reputation: 14247
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohioaninsc View Post
Elizabeth Warren has a lot of great policy positions that I completely 100% agree with...but this is not one of them. While I obviously I never what to see us have to use a nuke, nor should we make any decision about using one lightly, if we are truly under direct threat, then we need to have the option to use it as a last resort to protect the country. Now I would not use one to "protect another nation" or to "protect our corporate interests abroad".

While I don't agree with some of her policies, I thought she was pretty solid as a candidate. I have money on her on a betting website that she will win the nomination, but if this pledge gets brought up more, I see it being her downfall.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2019, 09:54 PM
 
Location: US
18,325 posts, read 18,094,191 times
Reputation: 14247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Listener2307 View Post
Doesn't matter. She won't ever be President.
I wonder what Beto's position is. Not that it matters, either.

lol true
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2019, 10:46 PM
 
5,678 posts, read 3,707,062 times
Reputation: 5515
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmw335xi View Post
You never know what scenario could come up in the future, it is foolish to tie your hands and announce it to the world. I feel like there could be scenarios in the future where we could use our nukes as a threat to stop it from happening. It's also gambling with potentially millions of lives that our defense systems would be successful.
Your whole rant is foolish.

Her hands aren’t tied. Politicians lie everyday. There’s nothing legally binding. They’re words to get votes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bmw335xi View Post
Isn't our largest bomb smaller than Russia's largest bomb?
Tsar bomb. 2 built. Soviet Union era. Theoretical 100 mega tons. Reduced to 50 in a test. Other one is a museum piece.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2019, 10:48 PM
 
Location: US
18,325 posts, read 18,094,191 times
Reputation: 14247
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordSquidworth View Post
Your whole rant is foolish.

Her hands aren’t tied. Politicians lie everyday. There’s nothing legally binding. They’re words to get votes.

She is a liar, I agree with you there. I'm surprised she isn't campaigning on to be... "the first Native American president"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2019, 11:03 PM
 
Location: California
30,834 posts, read 33,700,401 times
Reputation: 26275
Sign all the pledges you want, it's all just for show. It won't stop someone from using them and if we are at the point where it's a viable option no pledge is going to make a difference.

...."purity pledge"....hahaha
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2019, 11:09 PM
 
Location: the Sticks
9,105 posts, read 2,584,093 times
Reputation: 4800
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmw335xi View Post
That's my point, Warren says okay well if you shoot my friend, then I will shoot you back. You know Warren will be protected in a secret facility somewhere. We used two nukes on Japan without them launching any at us. I'm not saying we should be using nukes preemptively, but I am saying it does our country a disservice for her to publicly announce to the world my hands are tied no matter the situation or scenario that comes up in the future.

It's not just about retaliation, it's that if we wanted to we could destroy you before you even have the chance to launch nukes or develop nukes or export nukes or for any reason we deem necessary.



Ill try one more time and I am done.

Why is the average person afraid to punch a person like Mike Tyson? Tyson talks smack at the 175 pound guy. Why would the average guy just take it? Because of the threat of what would happen. That is called a deterrent.

Ok some people don't like Trump. In fact some absolutely hate him. The same is true of every president who ever served. What stops people from attacking them? What is the deterrent?

The consequences right?

What stops most people from acting like complete idiot in airports and on planes? The threat of arresting you before you do something or the consequences? That is called a deterrent.

Some might sweat North Korea or Iran. Their neighbors for sure. To countries like the USA, China or Russia, N.Korea's offensive capabilities are a joke, as are their abilities to retaliate.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/deterrent

Definition of deterrent
1 : serving to discourage, prevent, or inhibit : serving to deter

I don't like or have any respect for Warren, but what she said is basically our policy and has been for decades.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2019, 12:06 AM
 
411 posts, read 91,800 times
Reputation: 506
She doesnt have enough brain to even consider such a thing..WHO THE HELL IS SHE?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2019, 12:12 AM
 
Location: US
18,325 posts, read 18,094,191 times
Reputation: 14247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr78609 View Post
She doesnt have enough brain to even consider such a thing..WHO THE HELL IS SHE?
She got to where she is career wise by riding the backs of Native Americans on her applications. She got all her recent support from riding the back of Bernie Sanders.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2019, 03:16 AM
 
1,179 posts, read 222,008 times
Reputation: 795
She is a very smart and capable woman... Thats why Republicans are talking smack about her.

They can't handle women that actually stand up and talk back!


Claiming Native American heritage on a application (more then one??) based on stories she heard in her childhood is the only thing they have negativ on her.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top