{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
12/17/2013 2:36:29 PM
48
DEBATE: Are nuclear weapons justified?
Post your opinions! If you cant be bothered explaining, dont bother posting.
-
Yes. Nuclear pulse engines would be great for traveling to other planets if nuclear weapons were not banned in space. /loophole
-
Completely depends on the situation. Something like nuclear weapons are not a black and white issue that can be instantly written off as right or wrong. In a specific instance, such as the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.....they're something horrible and appalling, but yes, absolutely justified. The cost in lives to both the Allied forces and the Japanese themselves if Operation Overlord (the fullscale invasion of the Japanese home islands) had been done would be astronomical and absolutely unacceptable.
-
4 RepliesIn WWII it was. More people on both sides would have died had the US not dropped the bombs, it let hundreds of thousands of people live.
-
1 ReplyEdited by Madman Mordo: 12/17/2013 4:49:36 PMWe'd all like to live in a happy world full of sunshine and rainbows and unicorns and where nobody ever gets hurt. But unfortunately, that's not the planet we inhabit. Collectively as a species, we still have a lot of growing up to do, and there will always be political bodies and militias out there which certainly require nuclear weapons to deter. And yes, I do think nukes are as abhorrent as the next guy, but people wanting them banned outright are idealistic retards that think the world will magically fix itself as soon as they're eradicated.
-
1 Reply[quote]DEBATE[/quote] [quote]BATE[/quote] [quote]BAIT[/quote] [quote]B8[/quote] [spoiler]Half-Life 3 Confirmed.[/spoiler]
-
Edited by Banned Tyger: 12/19/2013 11:50:33 PMYea, your suffering shall exist no longer; it shall be washed away in Atom's Glow, burned from you in the fire of his brilliance!
-
3 RepliesHere come some made-up numbers for me to prove a point: Let's say country X and country Y are at war, and country X has nuclear weapons. Country X uses the nuclear weapons, and kills, say 137 000 people. That is better than a massive land invasion killing 600 000+ people.
-
They promote peace, well used to. When we dropped the bomb in Hiroshima, what country was going to fuck with us? HOWEVER, I'm not implying it's justified. It was wrong. Nowadays, it's scary. Anyone insisting that nukes prevent other countries nukes, you're retarded.
-
13 RepliesOn a related note, during the usual "Moments of silence" people hold on Pearl Harbor Day, I instead focus my thoughts on the thousands of Japanese civilians my country vaporized in the name of "peace".
-
5 RepliesIdk, ask Japan.
-
1 ReplyEdited by BerzerkCommando: 12/18/2013 12:39:32 PMWhy can't people just learn how to stop worrying and love the bomb?
-
2 RepliesNo, debate over.
-
8 RepliesIgnoring the deterrent factor, a single nuke isn't that bad in terms of radiation, it's only when there are multiple nukes in the same area that they become a problem Compare Hiroshima to Bikini Atoll and you'll understand.
-
5 RepliesEdited by SI19: 12/17/2013 4:13:58 PMThe whole point of them is contradictory. IF they were a deterrent of war to promote peace (as many goverments keep purporting), we wouldn't have the constant fear of being wiped off the face of the Earth if someone decided to say "*Feck* you!" and send a few off, which would ultimately result in everyone else joining in and fecking everything up. While nuclear weapons were developed first and led to relatively good uses later (nuclear power, though that in itself is a bit iffy with all the radioactive waste, nuclear fallout through meltdowns, etc, etc...), they should never have been invented. Many of the scientists who developed them to end the WWII early were regretful of their decisions, so that clearly shows something is horribly wrong with something that has such power to end all life within a km radius in a second, not to mention everyone else effected by the radiation after. TLDR; You can't have peace when in constant fear. Nuclear Weapons are a no-no.
-
I don't know. Perhaps World Order would crumble without them, but perhaps they'll be the end of us. But the question is, are they justified, relating to Justice, not the greater good. So it depends if many thousand of civilian lives wiped out can be justifiable.
-
I love how people say that Nukes are great because they prevent other Nukes. My god, you're retarded.
-
2 RepliesNo. I'm extremely against nuclear weapons and I wish that there could be a true global disarmament.
-
1 ReplyEdited by Quantum: 12/19/2013 9:31:58 AMNukes have prevented nuclear armed nations from launching direct attacks on each other since they were first invented, with an exception to the Kargil war where India quickly identified that Pakistan was behind the attacks. Yes, justified in existence, but not in use. (A small arsenal is sufficient)
-
Sure, I don't care.
-
Only in dire situations, and dire doesn't mean "oh, we're at war with someone of our own size, better nuke'em".
-
1 ReplyDoge plebeian.
-
As a deterrent, yes. The threat of near-instant, overwhelming retaliation is enough to ensure the world's superpower nations never go to war with each other again. Germany inadvertently stopped the cycle of world governments replacing themselves every so often.
-
Is destroying the world [i]ever[/i] justified? [spoiler]Probably[/spoiler]
-
-
I think the greatest argument in support of nuclear arms is that since their development, there hasn't been a war or even conflict between any of the world powers. That's almost 50 years of peace. That's unprecedented in world history. Are they justified? If using them leads to a quick, decisive victory over sacrificing the lives of millions of soldiers, yes. As terrible as they are, the loss of life inflicted by one or two nukes is small compared to the loss of life experienced in a total war scenario. Now, if their use led to nuclear retaliation and all out nuclear war, I don't think any conflict is worth that price. Better to be enslaved to a world power than to live in a dying world.
