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 08-02-2019, 10:07 PM
 
Location: US
18,321 posts, read 18,067,925 times
Reputation: 14243

Advertisements

.

During the recent debate, Warren said she would sign a pledge to not use a nuclear weapon unless one is used on us first.

This to me is a deal breaker... it's like having a gun and pledging you will never shoot unless you get shot first. Why do we need to see NYC blown up before we can protect ourselves?

.

Last edited by bmw335xi; 08-02-2019 at 10:18 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-02-2019, 10:23 PM
 
1,528 posts, read 634,483 times
Reputation: 1405
This poll is set up with a bias that makes it useless in gathering anything of value. Might want to rephrase it without the bias.
For example:

Do you support Warren's proposal that we should only use nukes in retaliation of nukes being used against us?

Yes
No

It's unfortunate that such a good question got butchered into something completely useless.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-02-2019, 10:26 PM
 
Location: US
18,321 posts, read 18,067,925 times
Reputation: 14243
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasLawyer2000 View Post
For example:

Do you support Warren's proposal that we should only use nukes in retaliation of nukes being used against us?

"Yes, we should announce to the world we won't use a nuke until one is first used on us"


If you agree with Warren, there is no false setup by answering the YES option, it's almost word for word what you said.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-02-2019, 10:29 PM
 
1,528 posts, read 634,483 times
Reputation: 1405
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmw335xi View Post
"Yes, we should announce to the world we won't use a nuke until one is first used on us"


If you agree with Warren, there is nothing bias by answering the YES option, it's almost word for word what you said.
Did you look at the alternate option?

"No, we shouldn't handcuff ourselves saying a city first has to be destroyed before we can use our most powerful weapons"

This is why people need to go to college. They don't understand how to do basic research and data gathering.

edit: Didn't expect the massive uptick in reps for the first post... Thanks strangers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-02-2019, 10:32 PM
 
Location: US
18,321 posts, read 18,067,925 times
Reputation: 14243
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasLawyer2000 View Post
Did you look at the alternate option?

"No, we shouldn't handcuff ourselves saying a city first has to be destroyed before we can use our most powerful weapons"

This is why people need to go to college. They don't understand how to do basic research and data gathering.

So you agree with Warren I take it?


People who vote NO is because they don't want to see a city destroyed before being able to use our nukes.


People who vote YES want to announce to the world thinking it will take away the fear.


Typical 2019 Democrat, when you have no answer, make personal attacks, lol. Soon you'll be calling me a racist.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-02-2019, 10:34 PM
 
Location: Bran's tree
11,200 posts, read 4,942,966 times
Reputation: 12502
So you're clamouring to be able to drop nukes around the world for less serious reasons?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-02-2019, 10:35 PM
 
1,528 posts, read 634,483 times
Reputation: 1405
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmw335xi View Post
So you agree with Warren I take it?


People who vote NO is because they don't want to see a city destroyed before being able to use our nukes.


People who vote YES want to announce to the world thinking it will take away the fear.


Typical 2019 Democrat, when you have no answer, make personal attacks, lol. Soon you'll be calling me a racist.
There's no personal attack here. I made a suggestion.

Also, I'm a conservative. I'm not surprised as you liberals like to make all sorts of assumptions rather than trying to understand.

I'd never vote for Warren, too extreme for me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-02-2019, 10:36 PM
 
1,804 posts, read 361,721 times
Reputation: 1584
I think Elizabeth Warren is a fool. The rest of what I think about her isn't allowed on C-D.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-02-2019, 10:37 PM
 
Location: Bran's tree
11,200 posts, read 4,942,966 times
Reputation: 12502
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmw335xi View Post
So you agree with Warren I take it?


People who vote NO is because they don't want to see a city destroyed before being able to use our nukes.


People who vote YES want to announce to the world thinking it will take away the fear.


Typical 2019 Democrat, when you have no answer, make personal attacks, lol. Soon you'll be calling me a racist.
Pretty presumptuous to assume people's reasons for voting yes or no.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-02-2019, 10:37 PM
 
23,703 posts, read 12,507,533 times
Reputation: 7555
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmw335xi View Post
.

During the recent debate, Warren said she would sign a pledge to not use a nuclear weapon unless one is used on us first.

This to me is a deal breaker... it's like having a gun and pledging you will never shoot unless you get shot first. Why do we need to see NYC blown up before we can protect ourselves?

.
I get the gesture -- it is a gesture. She's not saying she would get rid of nukes -- just that the USA would not initiate nuclear war.

It's a gesture ------ as the USA is asking everyone else to not make nukes -- it's the little things.

No it isn't a deal breaker -- it's a gesture.

Why would we nuke first?

No have nuclear weapons is not like having a gun at all.

And I assume law abiding citizens would only use a gun first if they were under attack or threatened.

See how that works.
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