Should the world have WMDs

anti-christ of suburbia:

Incubus:

spill_no_sick:

I_worship_tre_Cool:

anti-christ of suburbia:

no offence, but which country is the only one to actually have USED WMDs? thats right, AMERICA.

And it was needed when we did.


So what? Since America is the only country to use them, lets ignore all the countries testing them out and designing them, no thread there

"threat"
but good point
this thread should be retitled, "could the world not have WMDs?"

So you're saying certain countries should have WMD to stop others from causing harm with them?
Fair enough but if America neutralised the world of WMD would they disable their own? Would they fuck.
No one would have them. WMDs do actually what it says on the tin; they kill people, no good can come of them.

if no countries had them, America still would coz they would want to be superior, sorry, just human nature, were all bastards

the thing is, there is no chance in hell that America would be the only one left

there would be no situation in which less than five countries had WMDs

you go to History so you can learn from past mistakes

America isn't just taking out any country that has them, we're taking out any one who we think will abuse them (mass murderers are the types of people we're trying to get the WMDs out of the hands of......Russia has enough to blow up the world fourteen times over......we don't care because they aren't in the hands of one mass murdering terrorist Russian...just the government......see how you get the misconseption that we're bullies because we went after WMDs in the hands of terrorists? we were going after the terrorists anyway, the WMDs added urgency

i have noticed that countries such as n korea and iran who develop nuclear weapons are labelled "rogue states" by america and britain whereas other countries e.g. britain plans to buy more nuclear subs and are called allies hmmmmmmmmm

I also have noticed that since everyone is currently battling the war on terrorism wmds are pretty much useless because you couldn't bomb terrorists in large numbers without injuring civillians anyway

hmm. i think that there is a basic flaw in that we are attempting to prevent certain countries from using dangerous weaponry.. by using our own.

anti-christ of suburbia:

if no countries had them, America still would coz they would want to be superior, sorry, just human nature, were all bastards

then a country would have them.

Not realistic to expect the powers that be to give up their massive stockpiles of destructive shit, but it would be a dream come true if they did.

There's no reason to have nukes. To be able to kill MORE people with less fuss is one of the most despicable abilities you can have. Taking a life is, sorry, not justified. Jesus says that. Buddha says that. Gandhi says that. Muhammad said that, but made a few reservations.

I believe that the world at large wants gradual disarmament of nukes at the very least. The youth population always does, because we're young and idealistic. That's why we need to band together and change the world. We can do it, too. I know I'm running for Prez as soon as I turn 35.

i dont see why people feel they need to have things like that. if everyone would just have more respect for people's opinions and we stopped dividing the planet up into country's and all other sorts of borders, etc. we COULD all get along. people are just too big of assholes for that ever to happen.

Mellon * Collie:

i dont see why people feel they need to have things like that. if everyone would just have more respect for people's opinions and we stopped dividing the planet up into country's and all other sorts of borders, etc. we COULD all get along. people are just too big of assholes for that ever to happen.

Well it's not just that, if you did you'd either have to have one president/ prime minster for everywhere, which would be ridiculas because one person can't look after the whole world or you'd have one to a region which would defeat the whole propose of getting rid of borders in the first place.
It's just not realistic and anyway its in peoples nature have a bit prejudice to stamp it out completely you'd have to get rid of almost everything that makes us human.

Incubus:

Mellon * Collie:

i dont see why people feel they need to have things like that. if everyone would just have more respect for people's opinions and we stopped dividing the planet up into country's and all other sorts of borders, etc. we COULD all get along. people are just too big of assholes for that ever to happen.

Well it's not just that, if you did you'd either have to have one president/ prime minster for everywhere, which would be ridiculas because one person can't look after the whole world or you'd have one to a region which would defeat the whole propose of getting rid of borders in the first place.
It's just not realistic and anyway its in peoples nature have a bit prejudice to stamp it out completely you'd have to get rid of almost everything that makes us human.

i think you missed the point completely...

Incubus:

Mellon * Collie:

i dont see why people feel they need to have things like that. if everyone would just have more respect for people's opinions and we stopped dividing the planet up into country's and all other sorts of borders, etc. we COULD all get along. people are just too big of assholes for that ever to happen.

Well it's not just that, if you did you'd either have to have one president/ prime minster for everywhere, which would be ridiculas because one person can't look after the whole world or you'd have one to a region which would defeat the whole propose of getting rid of borders in the first place.
It's just not realistic and anyway its in peoples nature have a bit prejudice to stamp it out completely you'd have to get rid of almost everything that makes us human.

No really. What they were saying was if everyone respected eachother and their opinions.

And I think to get this happen, we need to educate people. Ignorance counts for a lot in this

Mellon * Collie:

Incubus:

Mellon * Collie:

i dont see why people feel they need to have things like that. if everyone would just have more respect for people's opinions and we stopped dividing the planet up into country's and all other sorts of borders, etc. we COULD all get along. people are just too big of assholes for that ever to happen.

Well it's not just that, if you did you'd either have to have one president/ prime minster for everywhere, which would be ridiculas because one person can't look after the whole world or you'd have one to a region which would defeat the whole propose of getting rid of borders in the first place.
It's just not realistic and anyway its in peoples nature have a bit prejudice to stamp it out completely you'd have to get rid of almost everything that makes us human.

i think you missed the point completely...

I don't think I did.
You want everyone to get along and play nicely? That's not going to happen, it's just not in human nature. Which is exacly why there are WMD in the first place, if people did respect one another they wouldn't feel the need to have weapons that can blow us all to bits.

I'm growing just a little sick of people saying stuff like, "America thinks it should be the only one with WMDs" or "America gets rid of WMDs by using them"
just so you know we're not trying to disarm everyone but ourselves, we're going more for Saddam and Hezbollah; and we're not using them, we just have them....we would only have to use them if we didn't have the best military in the world

Mellon * Collie:

i dont see why people feel they need to have things like that. if everyone would just have more respect for people's opinions and we stopped dividing the planet up into country's and all other sorts of borders, etc. we COULD all get along. people are just too big of assholes for that ever to happen.

LMFAO. because there werent race riots in bradford, were there...

*countries.

Mellon * Collie:

i dont see why people feel they need to have things like that. if everyone would just have more respect for people's opinions and we stopped dividing the planet up into country's and all other sorts of borders, etc. we COULD all get along. people are just too big of assholes for that ever to happen.

Communism?
That's actually been tried, it doesn't work very well. Dictators and whatnot. Plus people starve under communism, because there's no trade in a closed economy--it misses vital parts.
That may not be what you intended to mean, but it's exactly what you described. Sure, it eliminates the issue of WMDs, but it opens the door to about 438743985934 other problems that are harder to solve.

Kitti:

Mellon * Collie:

i dont see why people feel they need to have things like that. if everyone would just have more respect for people's opinions and we stopped dividing the planet up into country's and all other sorts of borders, etc. we COULD all get along. people are just too big of assholes for that ever to happen.

Communism?
That's actually been tried, it doesn't work very well. Dictators and whatnot. Plus people starve under communism, because there's no trade in a closed economy--it misses vital parts.
That may not be what you intended to mean, but it's exactly what you described. Sure, it eliminates the issue of WMDs, but it opens the door to about 438743985934 other problems that are harder to solve.

not really. because then what if with the supercountry there were separate areas, like states or counties, and some of them would still contain the people able to make WMDs and hence they could have them.

Pastor of Muppets:

Kitti:

Mellon * Collie:

i dont see why people feel they need to have things like that. if everyone would just have more respect for people's opinions and we stopped dividing the planet up into country's and all other sorts of borders, etc. we COULD all get along. people are just too big of assholes for that ever to happen.

Communism?
That's actually been tried, it doesn't work very well. Dictators and whatnot. Plus people starve under communism, because there's no trade in a closed economy--it misses vital parts.
That may not be what you intended to mean, but it's exactly what you described. Sure, it eliminates the issue of WMDs, but it opens the door to about 438743985934 other problems that are harder to solve.

not really. because then what if with the supercountry there were separate areas, like states or counties, and some of them would still contain the people able to make WMDs and hence they could have them.

Then it's not communist, is it? It has plot holes, yes, that's my point. But a communist government would do its best to keep one single state, because if there are divisions, it's not uniform and the government would fall. But...yep. It still doesn't work.

Kitti:

Then it's not communist, is it? It has plot holes, yes, that's my point. But a communist government would do its best to keep one single state, because if there are divisions, it's not uniform and the government would fall. But...yep. It still doesn't work.

ah yes, i see what you mean.