how old is the US's nuclear weapon stockpile?

2008-11-09 07:24:19

#51

Hurricane2k9: Pendulous Sweaty Balls; +1,538|6006|College Park, MD

.Sup wrote:
M.O.A.B wrote:
You do realise that if anyone else had nukes at the time they would have pretty much done the same things but in different places
Is that a fact? I'm pretty sure Hitler would do the same but he was evil. Was USA evil at the time?

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were horrible, but were the alternatives any better? A mainland invasion of Japan would've kept the war dragging on and on, costing millions of American, Japanese, and possibly Russian (IIRC, they were gonna invade Japan but we nuked Japan before that happened) lives.

https://static.bf2s.com/files/user/36793/marylandsig.jpg

2008-11-09 07:24:52

#52

usmarine: Banned; +2,785|7066

.Sup wrote:
M.O.A.B wrote:
You do realise that if anyone else had nukes at the time they would have pretty much done the same things but in different places
Is that a fact? I'm pretty sure Hitler would do the same but he was evil. Was USA evil at the time?

japan? russia? once again your ignorance stuns me.

2008-11-09 07:26:39

#53

M.O.A.B: 'Light 'em up!'; +1,220|6527|Escea

.Sup wrote:
M.O.A.B wrote:
You do realise that if anyone else had nukes at the time they would have pretty much done the same things but in different places
Is that a fact? I'm pretty sure Hitler would do the same but he was evil. Was USA evil at the time?

I can guarantee it, US firebombed Japanese cities, British firebombed Dresden, Russian's bombed pretty much everything. You telling me that the Russian's wouldn't have used a nuclear bomb against the Germans if they had one?

Besides if Hiroshima and Nagasaki hadn't happened, millions more people would have died in WW2 and it could have pushed into the very latter half of the 40's.

2008-11-09 07:27:54

#54

.Sup: be nice; +2,646|6758|The Twilight Zone

There are always alternatives. Murdering civilians is never they way to end a way-rather embarrassing way really. I never understood the part why drop two atomic bombs? You could have dropped one and if they still wouldn't surrender, dropped another one. They didn't have nukes anyway. Maybe just a revenge for PH, who knows.

https://www.shrani.si/f/3H/7h/45GTw71U/untitled-1.png

2008-11-09 07:30:01

#55

usmarine: Banned; +2,785|7066

.Sup wrote:
You could have dropped one and if they still wouldn't surrender, dropped another one.

ummmm......

/facedesk

2008-11-09 07:30:51

#56

jord: Member; +2,382|6983|The North, beyond the wall.

There doesn't need to be a reason, we got to test the effects of atomic bombs on people... For free!

And they were Japs!

2 birds with 1 stone.

2008-11-09 07:31:19

#57

M.O.A.B: 'Light 'em up!'; +1,220|6527|Escea

.Sup wrote:
You could have dropped one and if they still wouldn't surrender, dropped another one.

That's what they did, the Japanese government was warned to surrender and they didn't, first bomb was dropped and they still didn't surrender afterwards, the second bomb changed their minds.

2008-11-09 07:31:37

#58

.Sup: be nice; +2,646|6758|The Twilight Zone

usmarine wrote:
.Sup wrote:
You could have dropped one and if they still wouldn't surrender, dropped another one.
ummmm......

/facedesk

I'm still against dropping nukes to be perfectly clear. Just saying why drop two at the same time when 1 could do the "job".

2008-11-09 07:33:59

#59

usmarine: Banned; +2,785|7066

.Sup wrote:
usmarine wrote:
.Sup wrote:
You could have dropped one and if they still wouldn't surrender, dropped another one.
ummmm......

/facedesk
I'm still against dropping nukes to be perfectly clear. Just saying why drop two at the same time when 1 could do the "job".

you are saying we should have done what in fact we did do........come on .sup. keep up man.

2008-11-09 07:35:24

#60

Hurricane2k9: Pendulous Sweaty Balls; +1,538|6006|College Park, MD

.Sup wrote:
There are always alternatives. Murdering civilians is never they way to end a way-rather embarrassing way really. I never understood the part why drop two atomic bombs? You could have dropped one and if they still wouldn't surrender, dropped another one. They didn't have nukes anyway. Maybe just a revenge for PH, who knows.

The Japanese didn't have much regard for civilians or POWs:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_of_nanking

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bataan_Death_March

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_731

2008-11-09 07:37:03

#61

.Sup: be nice; +2,646|6758|The Twilight Zone

usmarine wrote:
.Sup wrote:
usmarine wrote:
ummmm......

/facedesk
I'm still against dropping nukes to be perfectly clear. Just saying why drop two at the same time when 1 could do the "job".
you are saying we should have done what in fact we did do........come on .sup. keep up man.

2 did the job, not 1

hurri you should read a book about Vietnam.

Last edited by .Sup (2008-11-09 07:37:40)

2008-11-09 07:38:29

#62

usmarine: Banned; +2,785|7066

.Sup wrote:
usmarine wrote:
.Sup wrote:

I'm still against dropping nukes to be perfectly clear. Just saying why drop two at the same time when 1 could do the "job".
you are saying we should have done what in fact we did do........come on .sup. keep up man.
2 did the job, not 1

hurri you should read a book about Vietnam.

we dropped one, they did not surrender. we dropped another, they surrendered. whats the matter with you?

2008-11-09 07:39:52

#63

.Sup: be nice; +2,646|6758|The Twilight Zone

usmarine wrote:
.Sup wrote:
usmarine wrote:

you are saying we should have done what in fact we did do........come on .sup. keep up man.
2 did the job, not 1

hurri you should read a book about Vietnam.
we dropped one, they did not surrender. we dropped another, they surrendered. whats the matter with you?

You should have dropped one on Tokio, that would do the job done
/sarcasm

2008-11-09 07:40:13

#64

M.O.A.B: 'Light 'em up!'; +1,220|6527|Escea

.Sup wrote:
usmarine wrote:
.Sup wrote:

I'm still against dropping nukes to be perfectly clear. Just saying why drop two at the same time when 1 could do the "job".
you are saying we should have done what in fact we did do........come on .sup. keep up man.
2 did the job, not 1

hurri you should read a book about Vietnam.

I could say that only a Tsar Bomba could have done it alone.

2008-11-09 07:41:32

#65

Hurricane2k9: Pendulous Sweaty Balls; +1,538|6006|College Park, MD

.Sup wrote:
hurri you should read a book about Vietnam.

Huh?

2008-11-09 07:42:32

#66

usmarine: Banned; +2,785|7066

this is stupid.

japan attacked US - fact
japan gets pwned - fact

/discussion

2008-11-09 07:42:35

#67

.Sup: be nice; +2,646|6758|The Twilight Zone

My belief is still the same: dropping nukes and killing civilians to end the war with Japs was a mistake. Lots of people are still suffering for it today. The only "positive" (if I can put it that way) thing is, it reminds us that nukes shouldn't be used again.

2008-11-09 07:42:49

#68

SEREVENT: MASSIVE G STAR; +605|6412|Birmingham, UK

jord wrote:
There doesn't need to be a reason, we got to test the effects of atomic bombs on people... For free!

You've never heard of Unit 731? Pretty much the same thing...

2008-11-09 07:43:52

#69

usmarine: Banned; +2,785|7066

.Sup wrote:
My belief is still the same: dropping nukes and killing civilians to end the war with Japs was a mistake.

civilians? they were training their people to fight. even kids and old men. so, most of the "civilians" you speak of were actually like the national guard.

2008-11-09 07:46:01

#70

.Sup: be nice; +2,646|6758|The Twilight Zone

usmarine wrote:
.Sup wrote:
My belief is still the same: dropping nukes and killing civilians to end the war with Japs was a mistake.
civilians? they were training their people to fight. even kids and old men. so, most of the "civilians" you speak of were actually like the national guard.

Yes all couple million of Hiroshima/Nagasaki inhabitants (elderly, kids, women) were trained soldiers
/sarcasm

2008-11-09 07:48:38

#71

usmarine: Banned; +2,785|7066

.Sup wrote:
usmarine wrote:
.Sup wrote:
My belief is still the same: dropping nukes and killing civilians to end the war with Japs was a mistake.
civilians? they were training their people to fight. even kids and old men. so, most of the "civilians" you speak of were actually like the national guard.
Yes all couple million of Hiroshima/Nagasaki inhabitants (elderly, kids, women) were trained soldiers
/sarcasm

i didnt say all. i would say 80% were trained in one way or another to fight. women were trained also. you seem to know very little and i dont feel like teaching you a history lesson.

2008-11-09 07:53:00

#72

.Sup: be nice; +2,646|6758|The Twilight Zone

usmarine wrote:
.Sup wrote:
usmarine wrote:

civilians? they were training their people to fight. even kids and old men. so, most of the "civilians" you speak of were actually like the national guard.
Yes all couple million of Hiroshima/Nagasaki inhabitants (elderly, kids, women) were trained soldiers
/sarcasm
i didnt say all. i would say 80% were trained in one way or another to fight. women were trained also. you seem to know very little and i dont feel like teaching you a history lesson.

I always had an A in history so I don't really think I need any education. Those people were taught to DEFEND themselves, same was in Russia when Army Group centre pushed for Moscow and civilians were left undefended until reinforcements came, same in Germany for the battle of Berlin...

2008-11-09 09:00:48

#73

Commie Killer: Member; +192|6691

.Sup give it up man, your ignorance is blatantly obvious on this topic.

2008-11-09 09:44:37

#74

.Sup: be nice; +2,646|6758|The Twilight Zone

Commie Killer wrote:
.Sup give it up man, your ignorance is blatantly obvious on this topic.

Nothing to give up here, just stating my opinion and point of view.

2008-11-09 09:51:55

#75

usmarine: Banned; +2,785|7066

Commie Killer wrote:
.Sup give it up man, your ignorance is blatantly obvious on this topic.

ya..its terrible. i am done with him.

BF2S Forums how old is the US's nuclear weapon stockpile?

.Sup wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

.Sup wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

.Sup wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

.Sup wrote:

.Sup wrote:

usmarine wrote:

.Sup wrote:

.Sup wrote:

usmarine wrote:

.Sup wrote:

.Sup wrote:

usmarine wrote:

.Sup wrote:

usmarine wrote:

.Sup wrote:

usmarine wrote:

.Sup wrote:

usmarine wrote:

.Sup wrote:

usmarine wrote:

.Sup wrote:

usmarine wrote:

.Sup wrote:

.Sup wrote:

jord wrote:

.Sup wrote:

usmarine wrote:

.Sup wrote:

.Sup wrote:

usmarine wrote:

.Sup wrote:

usmarine wrote:

.Sup wrote:

usmarine wrote:

Commie Killer wrote:

Commie Killer wrote:

Board footer