It's our birthday!
Win 100c on our birthday Twitter comp, and party with us this weekend as Habbox turns 21!
Show your pride!
Rainbows galore in our forum shop, including snazzy colours for your username and even a rainbow-coloured... football?
Join Habbox!
Be part of the Habbox family - there are so many roles to pick from! Click here to get your application rolling


Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 27
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    16,195
    Tokens
    3,454

    Latest Awards:

    Default Go Nuclear - Yes or no?

    Ok there has been many new's articles and thing about nuclear bombs. I was thinking should we use Nuclear bombs to end wars - or will it just make things worse?

    Good Point:

    It ended the second world war when America hit Japan with Nuclear bombs - otherwise the Japanese proably wouldn't have surendered.

    Bad Point:

    They destroy a lot of places and polute a lot!


    Views?

    +1

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    CARDIFFFF!
    Posts
    250
    Tokens
    0

    Default

    It'd be WWI all over again, due to Alliances etc.

    If we nuke, Iraq etc, China fire back, as China pretty much want a war.
    France, then steps in against China, Russia then steps in against France.
    America then steps in against Russia.

    Think of it as WWIII.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Selby
    Posts
    3,357
    Tokens
    2,165

    Latest Awards:

    Default

    Nuclear arms have only ever been used twice and that was to bring an end to something that was already causing misery for many countries around the world. If the bombs were not dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki it's possible the war could have gone on for much longer and resulted in greater loss of life to the allied forces, however I doubt this would have been equal to the loss of like in both nuclear bombings.

    The world is holding itself ransom at the moment to a certain extent, there are 9 countries in the world which have nuclear arms this is potentially very dangerous. The world is in an understanding that if a nuclear missile was launched there would be the same reaction from almost every other country which holds nuclear arms, essentially we'd end up making most of our planet uninhabitable. Below are estimated figures of how many nuclear warheads the 9 countries each own, I find the numbers staggering.

    The numbers aside Russia and the United States represent the following; Active missiles / total (information taken from Wikipedia)

    United States - 4,075 / 5,535
    Russia - 5,830 / 16,000
    United Kingdom - 200
    France - 50
    China - <160
    India - 70-120
    Pakistan - 30-80
    North Korea - 0-10
    Israel - 75-20

    Matt lurvs Jay

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    CARDIFFFF!
    Posts
    250
    Tokens
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mat64 View Post
    Nuclear arms have only ever been used twice and that was to bring an end to something that was already causing misery for many countries around the world. If the bombs were not dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki it's possible the war could have gone on for much longer and resulted in greater loss of life to the allied forces, however I doubt this would have been equal to the loss of like in both nuclear bombings.

    The world is holding itself ransom at the moment to a certain extent, there are 9 countries in the world which have nuclear arms this is potentially very dangerous. The world is in an understanding that if a nuclear missile was launched there would be the same reaction from almost every other country which holds nuclear arms, essentially we'd end up making most of our planet uninhabitable. Below are estimated figures of how many nuclear warheads the 9 countries each own, I find the numbers staggering.

    The numbers aside Russia and the United States represent the following; Active missiles / total (information taken from Wikipedia)

    United States - 4,075 / 5,535
    Russia - 5,830 / 16,000
    United Kingdom - 200
    France - 50
    China - <160
    India - 70-120
    Pakistan - 30-80
    North Korea - 0-10
    Israel - 75-20

    Yup.

    As I've said,

    (> = attacks/nukes etc)

    US > Iraq
    UK > Iraq (Nuke dropped)
    China > UK (Nuke dropped)
    France > China (Nuke dropped)
    US > China (Nuke dropped)
    Russia > US (Nuke dropped)

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    16,195
    Tokens
    3,454

    Latest Awards:

    Default

    Yeh i agree with you there.

    Nuclear COULD start a war and it COULD end it!

    Just imagine if someone bombed a place where they are keepnig the nuclear bombs


  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    ═╬═
    Posts
    7,060
    Tokens
    182

    Latest Awards:

    Default

    No single nation would be moronic enough to file a nuclear missile... They'd get blown to pieces by the retaliation
    Conductor of the Runaway Train of Militant Homosexuality

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Nottingham
    Posts
    7,752
    Tokens
    756
    Habbo
    katie.pricejorda

    Latest Awards:

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Technologic View Post
    No single nation would be moronic enough to file a nuclear missile... They'd get blown to pieces by the retaliation
    It's so very true. If anyone was ever going to set off a nuclear bomb again, it would of been in the Cold war.

    If someone sent a nuclear bomb to your country would you agree to sending one (or more) back? I think it's fair to send them back and finish the country off

    Mind you the UK would just say 'HUMAN RIGHTS MEANS WE CANNOT SEND BACK A NUCLEAR BOMB, EVEN IF THE RUSSIAN'S HAVE BOMBED US 9 TIMES OVER'

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    5,253
    Tokens
    3,625

    Latest Awards:

    Default

    only skim read this but

    in Your Negitives you fail to mention the loss of life, especially in the case study you used of the American bombings, that of the horrific loss of Civilians, disfigurations, burns, Birth defects, tumours, prevent the soil from being used easily again for crops

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    16,195
    Tokens
    3,454

    Latest Awards:

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Technologic View Post
    No single nation would be moronic enough to file a nuclear missile... They'd get blown to pieces by the retaliation
    Therefore the American's and Russians will come up with something even more stupidso they are the only people with them

    Quote Originally Posted by Jordy View Post
    It's so very true. If anyone was ever going to set off a nuclear bomb again, it would of been in the Cold war.

    If someone sent a nuclear bomb to your country would you agree to sending one (or more) back? I think it's fair to send them back and finish the country off

    Mind you the UK would just say 'HUMAN RIGHTS MEANS WE CANNOT SEND BACK A NUCLEAR BOMB, EVEN IF THE RUSSIAN'S HAVE BOMBED US 9 TIMES OVER'
    WOW i could not agree more! I think i like you!I have always said this that anything that happens to us Humber Right's would stop us retaliating.

    You have to remember the people that shot it were only following orders. etc etc.

    God our law is crap.


  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    2,029
    Tokens
    75

    Latest Awards:

    Default

    There is a simple way to stop the problems, give Nuclear Weapons to every nation and then no one will wanna fire at each other for fear of retaliation.
    Thats what I would do anyway

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •