State of the union - And all the other speeches..

[Ludacris]

always with war.......can't they just get along ####? war brings nuthin but death.......#### WAR......yeah sure some people will just say go with the war, kill those iraq people and all that but don't U realize that the people aren't the one who should be suffering? it's the army and only them who should be suffering........I mean because of war, lost a huge part of my family........War should only be of last resort, not just because Bush thinks they're hiding sumthin........anyway.......#### that whole war $hit, getting on my nerves...........

[Nantuko Joe]

[quoteost_uid0="princevegetam"]hmm... interesting since i seem to recall that the U.S. used an atomic bomb on japan?

and italy doesn't have nukes.

only the following countries do:

Britain
China
France
India
Pakistan
Russia
United States
Israel (possibly, unconfirmed)[/quote]
Well, seeing as how an atom bomb is NOT a nuclear weapon, I can still say that we've never nuked another country.

and give me a break. Every major european country has nukes. Canada has nukes. hell, even Australia has nukes.

[princevegetam]

and where did you get that from?

not every major european country has nukes, neither does Canada or australia. None of them has ever even researched this stuff.

My Source: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0762462.html

atom bomb is a nuclear weapon. it converts matter into energy just like a nuclear weapon. it kills millions of people. the name may be different but the effects are devastating nonetheless.

[Nantuko Joe]

An atom bomb is NOT a nuclear weapon. The bombs we have today have over 15 times the force of the bomb we dropped on Hiroshima. The atom bomb splits a hydrogen atom (I think), while a nuclear weapon uses uranium: which is MUCH stronger and MUCH more unstable than hydrogen. Nuclear weapons have much longer half-lives than atom bombs for the radiation to decay. Nuclear and atom bombs may have devastating results, but they're classified by the amount of damage that they cause. Besides, the effects of a scud missle are also "devastating nonetheless" (a scud could level my entire development). It's not classified as nuclear because aside from not splitting atoms, it has nowhere near the force of an atom bomb. Atom bombs have nowhere near the force of our weakest nuclear weapon.

[SSJKarma]

the almighty H-BOMB your talking about nantuko !

H-BOMB and NUCLEAR BOMB are the same nantuko, except the H-BOMB does have a lot less RADIO-ACTIVITY !
but it has some nontheless !

but why is it still RADIO-ACTIVE ?
because the atoms your are calling on is HYDROGEN, which is what constitute 90% of anything on earth !
it is all having the same process of detonating too !
example:
NUCLEAR BOMB : the COLD-FUSION make the ATOMS going crazy until it reaches CRITICAL MASS which then the atoms explode and evaporate but when an ATOMS explodes it does what we call RADIO-ACTIVITY. now add a lot of explosive and a lot of PLUTONIUM (very unstable which gives the HIGH RADIO ACTIVITY) to that and you got what we call an NUKE

HYDROGEN BOMB : the same process as above, but doesn't have PLUTONIUM, still it has the same COLD-FUSION process which also produce RADIO-ACTIVITY, but since they only use HYDROGEN with no PLUTONIUM or any other HIGHLY UNSTABLE ELEMENT the level of RADIO-ACTIVITY is kept to a MINIMUM but that also make the H-BOMB a lot less powerfull then a NUKE !

see they both are the same ! except that one has a lot less RADIO-ACTIVITY then the other ! And sorry, but it is really a NUKE that has been sent to HIROSHIMA, why ? because only the US had NUKES at that time which is why no one replyed by sending some !

now...
how can we have nuke in our country ? (canada)
look in history we never fought any war ! except those where YOU (USA) needed our troops !
YOU (USA) have been protecting us almost from day one !
why do you think your protecting us ?
even tho i hate to admit that, we are your weakpoint !
any country knows that if they attack us and succeed in controlling our country then USA will be a lot easier to get after that ! which is why we have been allies from almost day one of the creation of the 13 colony !

anyway...
USA, RUSSIA, JAPAN, GERMANY and the likes that were involved in WWII are all the countryes that have actual MASS DESTRUCTION WEAPONS !

and USA have been testing their weapons as well my dear, or how could they have known the real effects ?
surely not by destroying the underground !



Edited By SSJKarma on Jan. 29 2003 at 04:11

[bloodpack]

H-bomb
Z-bomb
A-bomb
sex-bomb

whats the difference
they all kill ppl...
whether for good intentions or bad... lain:

[Nantuko Joe]

The H bomb and A bomb are COMPLETELY different than today's nuclear weapons, because today's nuclear weapons cause 10-20 times the devastation of ANY Atomic or hydrogen bomb. That's a FACT.

Now let's get this convo OFF of nukes, and back on-topic.

[bloodpack]

errr...what was the topic again ??? :biggrin: (joke)

[princevegetam]

stop using the fact that an atom bomb is weaker than a nuke as an excuse for the bombings on japan. the fact is that it was WRONG,many INNOCENT ppl died and it is an example of irresponsible use of the nuclear weapon. it is a weapon of mass destruction because it can blow up a city, such as hiroshima and nagasaki. a scud missle is not a weapon of mass destruction because it can't destroy a city.

SSJKARMA: there's no such thing as cold fusion, it's fictional. there's only fusion and that is what is used in nuclear weapons. and only USA and RUSSIA have weapons of mass destruction. Japan never had weapons, but they tested biological/chemical weapons before(on chinese). i doubt they have it anymore. same with the germans. other countries such as China, Britain, France, India developed nuclear weapons during the cold war era when the US and RUSSIA were the only ones with nuclear weapons.

[SiLent_BoB]

prince if we hadn't bombed japan we would still lose more u.s. casulaties in 1945.The fact is, the u.s. told japan to surrender or we would bomb them.Yes i agree the outcome was horrid but it was Us or Them.

on the subject against iraq. I know iraq isn't the main enemy(terrorists) but they have been a thorn in our side for too long. If it had been my way i would have attacked afghanistan the first time we were attacked. Terrorists are like bullys they will keep beating you up until you stand up for yourself. besides we know saddam is unstable and HAS weapons of MASS DESTRUCTION. I'd say bum rush iraq take out saddam and control it as a colony.(we could use that oil)

don't get me wrong though i dislike war as much as anybody but this was bound to happen anways.

p.s. karma just because canada is right above us doenst mean it will make it easier to attack america. Its pretty cold and harsh up there(you already know that) and there are some impassble mountains. I don't think a army who is used to blazing hot desert climate would do too well in near sub artic tempatures.