U.S. Tells Iran, Syria, N. Korea: "Learn from Iraq"

[riverline]

Re: Re: U.S. Tells Iran, Syria, N. Korea: "Learn from Iraq"

Originally posted by dsdsds
It's simple. U.S. (and many other countries) are too chicken shit to fight with someone her own size. Too much to lose.
I've said it before, the only way we can acheive total world peace is for everyone to be nuclear armed

GOD bless you dsdsds

The US is going to be probably busy disarming nations in the next 40 years...results:

a. The objective wont be achieved.

b. the world will have enough wars to make the earth full of smoke for years and years.

b. some nations will take preventive actions to the US attacks by quickly building their neuclear capablities.


Oh, riverline, do you think the white house is not wise enuogh to draw your conclusion?
oh, I know it must be something else, its not hard to figure out!!!

 

[dsdsds]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: U.S. Tells Iran, Syria, N. Korea: "Learn from Iraq"

Originally posted by ~The_Chosen~

Nukes were built for one purpose: destruction

No, not really Nukes are far more effective when kept safely stored and polished.
You can intimidate, and you get respected -- paving the way for deplomacy.

 

[Mrhero54]

ClockWood, ColdDrake

I can't believe your arrogance. It is that same attitude that will lead to the downfall of our country. It is that attitude that fosters terroist attacks and anti-american sentiment.

America cannot be beaten!!??:bugeye:

If America went to war with China they'd probably kick our ass unless we went nuclear, not to mention, despite the fact that Russia and America have been disarming, Russia still has about a thousand more nukes than we do. Americans are also much softer when it comes to losses, most countries can suffer way more deaths than American's can. WE ARE NOT INVINCIBLE.

The better figther does not always win the fight....

 

[sycoindian]

It is just as saying let every household in a town have a gun and there will be peace. Since obviously, no one wants to start anything with a family that has a gun

umm.. ur reasonin is quite flawed.. comparing nukes to guns is quite erroneous... 2 opposing nations having deployable nukes vs 2 ppl having guns is not comparable..