Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Can we look beyond this dinky N Korea BS

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    I remember Obama suggesting a Nuclear weapons limit down to zero for all countries. I cringed. Realized just rhetoric. I get the reluctance to lower the nuclear stockpile numbers. Expensive to build. But after a few decades, they are more expensive to maintain. Not happy with a few Hundred, make it 1,500. Good round number, adequate for any defense and a reduction of 75%.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by megman View Post

      Yeah, I see you didn't get the memo. President Nixon authorized the DOD back in the early 70's (Russians did the same in an informal agreement) to eliminate all chemical weapon stockpiles that the US possessed. What a mess. Hastily built in many forms (large bombs down to small munitions) back in the 40's-60's. Much on the edge of leaking. Multi-Billion dollar factory built on the Johnston Atoll in the Pacific. Finally started destroying it all in 1990. It quietly finished the job after a quarter Century with the last chemical weapons package not 2-3 years ago.
      And if they finished it quietly how is it YOU know they did it?[/QUOTE]

      I meant the milestone was achieved with almost no fanfare. Pretty amazing considering what they achieved. Much more deadly to mankind than nuclear weapons will ever be.

      Comment


      • #18
        removing stockpiles of chemical weapons is not the same as ending a chemical weapon program.

        Glad we did the former, wish we would do the latter.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by PSA View Post
          removing stockpiles of chemical weapons is not the same as ending a chemical weapon program.

          Glad we did the former, wish we would do the latter.
          Kinda like reducing your nuclear stockpile down to zero, Solves the immediate problem but you have the manuals that tell you how to build more.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by PSA View Post
            removing stockpiles of chemical weapons is not the same as ending a chemical weapon program.
            rounded
            Glad we did the former, wish we would do the latter.
            FYI. In case you're interested in the history of US Chemical Warfare program started in the late 40's (in response to the Soviets). Though the Nazi's never deployed chemical weapons in WW2, unlike WW1, they were developing the an active chemical warfare program (some used on the Jews in the Death Camps) near the end. Nasty stuff. "Operation Paperclip" rounded them up along with the rocket scientists (Von Braun) and secretly got them to work for the US chemical warfare industry. Von Braun got us to the Moon. See on Kindle "Operation Paperclip" by author Annie Jacobsen.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by davecombs View Post
              Find the hottest ones (we'll make the assumption there are a few), give them their shots and a good scrubbing, dress them up a little and have a Poontang for Pyongyang fundraiser.
              ahh, dinner and a date...

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by anue View Post

                ahh, dinner and a date...
                LOL

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by WTexasCrude
                  Kinda like reducing your nuclear stockpile down to zero, Solves the immediate problem but you have the manuals that tell you how to build more.
                  Touche`

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X