Obama's talk of 'world without nukes' - bad idea

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Cloud Breaker

Cloud Breaker

Master Knight
I'm not as capable in making a good speech as Obama is so I'm going to put in simple worlds why I think 'world without nukes' is a bad idea: ballistic missiles armed with nuclear warheads that are capable of reaching outer space will be integral for defense against potential hostile alien invasions. Therefore it's suicidal to get rid of them.

Take for example the movie Independence Day; Why the hell did the President of Somesuch not beat the crap out of that ****ing alien mothership using just 1000 nukes? That's less than 10% of what the world has. Obama is yet another president who will make the same mistake.

Don't ignore me, say something.  :mad:




Oh wait. 1000 will destroy the Earth too. Make it 50. Still more than enough.
 
Well, world without nukes would be the world of neverending local wars all over the Earth. Ups. It has already happen. Well, may be we really don't need nukes anymore.
 
Maybe not now, but later, we might need them. Like, 50 years ago, the radio waves that has emanated from Earth since the invention of radios, had reached a planet inhabited by a space-faring alien civilization, who picked it up, got too curious, and sent emissaries to see if we can't taste good enough for them, who are as of now on approach towards our planet. Maybe they'll arrive in 20 more years, 40 more years, maybe a century or a millennium, depending on their propulsion technology. We'll need nukes to kick them out, unless we develop a high-powered mass driver like rail guns or such. But I think nukes are far simpler to use and look more impressive. And likely the most powerful weapon to grace humanity. An F-F-F bomb the size of Viljahmir's head will be enough to wipe out half of Earth, so yeah, we'd best keep it.
 
Tell me what's unrealistic about extraterrestrial civilization existing that are capable of interstellar travel and spectroscopy, who'd want to destroy our civilization. Scientifically it's a perfectly plausible hypothesis.


I'm not saying that aliens will invade us anytime soon, I'm not that stupid or paranoid, because if they were, we'd have sensed their spectral signature already, but if the future presidents keep following Obama's footsteps, we'll be in big trouble when and if an alien civilization come for us. It's best that we continue developing nuclear weaponry, and exercise control over it.
 
Well, it's clear as a crystal that Obama in fact is team-playing with those aliens. Just look at the shape of his head, and his wide smile. There is no doubt that he is nothing less than an alien in disguise. Thus his effort to rid the world of it's intergallactic defense system.
 
I suggest you log of at this very moment, and do something about it. We can't sit by and let aliens take over the world! They might take our jobs!
 
In a more... realistic scenario nuclear weapons would probably be the best defense against asteroids and the like.
 
@Cymro

That's very true, although I bet Obama will already have excuses like 'we can just use rockets to push them away' even though he understands very little of pushing rocks with kinetic drivers. And rockets will work better than nuclear weapons in deflecting asteroids because we can better control the trajectory of the asteroids, so people won't think that's a very strong reason to keep nukes with us. I know an 'alien invasion' is an unlikely scenario, but it's still a plausible and very devastating one, and it's still worth being prepared for it, because there really isn't much risk in the preparation, like AI's going rogue and instigating a full-scale nuclear war; at least, not more than the risk of humanity being destroyed by aliens. The past 60 years have shown that humanity is capable of controlling nuclear technology, so why shouldn't we just keep doing what we've been doing well all along?

Obama does not clearly understand the benefit of keeping nuclear weapons. He's only pointing out again what all self-righteous humanitarian prophets have pointed out since before he was born. Though I'm partially glad that at least N.K. won't be listening to him.  :lol:


Calathar said:
ummm...time to take your medicine mr breaker...  :neutral:
Click to expand...


Mayhap it're the medicines that're making me type these, don't you think?
 
Aliens, really. You think we should keep nukes JUST for aliens. I'm sure Obama will have a fun time trying to explain that to the united states. BTW what viljamr said is entirely correct, any aliens with the technology to travel to earth with a battle ready fleet will probably beat us regardless. (didn't we discuss the weakness of nuclear weapons in space?)

PS: Stop watching Independence Day
 
The thing Obama has to consider is the potential effect on the world if we keep them. That is, if one was to go off accidentally, then the world would go ape****.
 
@CoF

I've never watched I.D.

Regarding the matter of alien fleet being too powerful, I think we still have time to prepare for a 'hypothetical' invasion, because we are still alive, and our rudimentary sensors haven't picked up any suspicious blue-shifts yet. So we shouldn't stop now. And I understand we have EMP problems to deal with when using nukes in space, but that can also work for us, because maybe, the aliens aren't that powerful, and we can disable their machinery with the EMP from nukes. And IP travel doesn't mean 'hyperspace drives' or 'wormhole' or some such; they could still reach us using sub-light engines, like, an ion-drive that can accelerate an object up to tenth the light speed, (which is already possible within human technology if given enough $) which will mean that if an alien civilization 50 light years away had picked up radio signals from us 100 years ago, we'll have 400 years to prepare if they decide to come for us, time enough to increase the yield of our nukes and develop better delivery methods, capable of overcoming possible laser-powered point-defense systems of the alien fleet.

The only issue I have with Obama is not that he's ridding the world of nukes, but rather that he didn't even consider the single most significant benefit of nuclear weapons, which is planetary defense. His issue is only with world politics, and not the fate of humanity as a whole. He's basically telling us to stand naked when guns start popping. 
 
When the nukes start flying over the world, when Russia gets uppity and decides to wipe out America, then we will be standing naked.

Bottom line is, there's a chance that Extra Terrestrials might come and attack, but it's a ****ing small one.
 
If the aliens are capable of interstellar travel, what makes you think they won't have an even better destructive capability than us? We have nukes, and we can barely reach past Pluto, any aliens would have to have gone beyond their own solar system would probably require more advanced technology than nuclear fission/fusion power.

No, a world without nukes would be a bad idea not because of the aliens, but because of escalation. Knowing that the other guy you are fighting has the capacity to turn a small scale firefight into an excuse to obliterate a city tends to give one cause to rethink an invasion plan.

@Alex: Do not make a Nuclear Error.

@CB: Nukes are a lot better at generating electricity than planetary defense, XP Physics worlds aside.

@Audun: I'm guessing a few months, maybe a year.
 
@Audun

The current F-F-F Bombs will likely not be capable of disabling an alien ship of any size if it was capable of staying functional after interstellar travel. Nukes deal significantly less kinetic damage in a vacuum environment. That is why we shouldn't stop the development of nuclear weapons now.

@AK47

Read my post regarding aliens not being overwhelmingly powerful, and we still having time to develop better nuclear weapons.

But I agree with you on one point; due to humanity's inherent stupidity, escalation will be the more likely reason for a global catastrophe than an alien invasion. I think I will have no choice but to agree that global disarmament is necessary at this point, but I still will feel safer if it can be assured that we'll be developing something else to defend ourselves with. Obama did not promise us with another interplanetary defense system in lieu of lost nuclear capability.

@CB: Nukes are a lot better at generating electricity than planetary defense, XP Physics worlds aside.
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about nuclear technology as a whole. Just what Obama is threatening to rob us of.
 
Cloud Breaker said:
@Audun

The current F-F-F Bombs will likely not be capable of disabling an alien ship of any size if it was capable of staying functional after interstellar travel. Nukes deal significantly less kinetic damage in a vacuum environment. That is why we shouldn't stop the development of nuclear weapons now.
Click to expand...

Solution: Research any of the following:
Hypervelocity Electromagnetic Cannons.
Antimatter (Large quantity manufacturing and storage).
Directed Energy Weapons.
There's also a couple of futuristic weapons which would be a whole lot more effective in space than nukes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

SP - General Opinion, problems and suggestions on M&B II Bannerlord
Replies
3
Views
457
Lokey7800
Erundil
Native OSP 3D Art Better Banners
Replies
7
Views
1K
Erundil
Erundil
Tintenkobold
Garrison auto donation - We have to talk
2
Replies
20
Views
2K
Yoshioki Ouchi
Yoshioki Ouchi
Back
Top Bottom