Errrr?

[Google90]

http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribun ... 22223.html

[Evilperson]

Situations like that make me hate people in general.

[Barihawk]

And? Most governments plan wars months or even years before they happen. Do you not think that we have battle plans with other nuclear powers like Russia, China, or North Korea? They sure as hell have battle plans set out. Surely Iran has battle plans to invade nations such as Israel?

 

 

 

There is a major difference between planning and doing. It's just the media blowing the thing out of proportion. We have nuclear options against many nations.

 

 

 

Remember. There are many countries around the world with missiles pointed at the United States...and vice-versa.

[indy500fan]

i was kind of hoping it would wait till after i move out of here into my house i am designing. in that house i am going to have a bomb shelter, with plenty of food and supplies for a while. not that it would matter anyways because id run out eventually and have to go out into the radioactiveness, but id live a little longer.

 

 

 

and im serious too, not joking about any of that. :?

[____]

i was kind of hoping it would wait till after i move out of here into my house i am designing. in that house i am going to have a bomb shelter, with plenty of food and supplies for a while. not that it would matter anyways because id run out eventually and have to go out into the radioactiveness, but id live a little longer.

 

 

 

and im serious too, not joking about any of that. :?

So you'd have all that, but no radiation suit? For shame.

[Giordano]

i was kind of hoping it would wait till after i move out of here into my house i am designing. in that house i am going to have a bomb shelter, with plenty of food and supplies for a while. not that it would matter anyways because id run out eventually and have to go out into the radioactiveness, but id live a little longer.

 

 

 

and im serious too, not joking about any of that. :?

 

They did that during the cold war, why not?

 

 

 

I don't get why the US can have nuclear missles and no one else can? If they want to take away all the nukes, at least take out theirs. (not before a war, but remove some during war and the take all out after war)

 

 

 

P.S United States have over 10,000 nukes :shock:

[runesmithie]

i was kind of hoping it would wait till after i move out of here into my house i am designing. in that house i am going to have a bomb shelter, with plenty of food and supplies for a while. not that it would matter anyways because id run out eventually and have to go out into the radioactiveness, but id live a little longer.

 

 

 

and im serious too, not joking about any of that. :?

So you'd have all that, but no radiation suit? For shame.

 

 

 

Makes me wish I was good old Burt (from Tremors).....

 

 

 

Survivalists ftw :P

[Barihawk]

i was kind of hoping it would wait till after i move out of here into my house i am designing. in that house i am going to have a bomb shelter, with plenty of food and supplies for a while. not that it would matter anyways because id run out eventually and have to go out into the radioactiveness, but id live a little longer.

 

 

 

and im serious too, not joking about any of that. :?

 

They did that during the cold war, why not?

 

 

 

I don't get why the US can have nuclear missles and no one else can? If they want to take away all the nukes, at least take out theirs. (not before a war, but remove some during war and the take all out after war)

 

 

 

P.S United States have over 10,000 nukes :shock:

 

 

 

It's because the US and Russia are going under disarmament (which due to cost measures takes a long time). We don't want anyone else developing nuclear weapons why we are getting rid of ours. The US will take 25 years to disarm, Russia 30, and China 15 (if they continue). We are gradually getting rid of them, but we still write them into our battle plans since we still have them.

[indy500fan]

So you'd have all that, but no radiation suit? For shame.

 

 

 

actually i did think of that, was going to write more about my plans, just decided not too :o . there are radiation suits, solar panels and electric converters, room full of plants that makes oxygen (still got some technical details to work out :lol: ), possibility of a breeding and slaughtering room (probably chickens, can do a lot with the meat, and then you have eggs too. and they reproduce fairly quickly, and use their crap for fertilizer) but thats all plans for the long haul. all im probably going to do is a room below the cellar that has food and a few big batteries charged at all times so i can have lights on for my last living days :D

[Giordano]

i was kind of hoping it would wait till after i move out of here into my house i am designing. in that house i am going to have a bomb shelter, with plenty of food and supplies for a while. not that it would matter anyways because id run out eventually and have to go out into the radioactiveness, but id live a little longer.

 

 

 

and im serious too, not joking about any of that. :?

 

They did that during the cold war, why not?

 

 

 

I don't get why the US can have nuclear missles and no one else can? If they want to take away all the nukes, at least take out theirs. (not before a war, but remove some during war and the take all out after war)

 

 

 

P.S United States have over 10,000 nukes :shock:

 

 

 

It's because the US and Russia are going under disarmament (which due to cost measures takes a long time). We don't want anyone else developing nuclear weapons why we are getting rid of ours. The US will take 25 years to disarm, Russia 30, and China 15 (if they continue). We are gradually getting rid of them, but we still write them into our battle plans since we still have them.

 

 

 

I was trying explain that too, but you said it better.

[assassin_696]

Remember. There are many countries around the world with missiles pointed at the United States...and vice-versa.

 

 

 

Really? I don't mean to be picky but I didn't think that was the case anymore. As far as I know there are seven countries with nuclear weapons, the US, Russia, the UK, France, China, India, Pakistan and North Korea. Out of those i'd say only the first 5 have the capabilities to deliver them over a long enough range to target countries on a global scale (ICBMs and submarines with ballistic capabilities). And ironically they're the five permanent members of the UN security council. I know that doesn't mean anything but I thought since the cold war countries only had nuclear weapons delivery strategies developed to attack their "allies" in a theoretical sense. I could be wrong but it's just what I thought.

[Mercifull]

Makes me wish I was good old Burt (from Tremors).....

Make sure you have thick concrete walls in the bunker though. Gotta plan for "underground goddamn monsters" ^_^

[SAGE]

I say Iran changes their name and America being America will give up trying to find Iran. Its possible, In my imagination. Barihawk speaks the truth, everything in that post was spot on

[Striker6]

the US, Russia, the UK, France, China, India, Pakistan and North Korea

 

 

 

Israel also..

[runesmithie]

Makes me wish I was good old Burt (from Tremors).....

Make sure you have thick concrete walls in the bunker though. Gotta plan for "underground goddamn monsters" ^_^

 

 

 

And/or an arsenal big enough to take out a few thousand of them..... or zombies, whatever the case may be :P

[Barihawk]

Remember. There are many countries around the world with missiles pointed at the United States...and vice-versa.

 

 

 

Really? I don't mean to be picky but I didn't think that was the case anymore. As far as I know there are seven countries with nuclear weapons, the US, Russia, the UK, France, China, India, Pakistan and North Korea. Out of those i'd say only the first 5 have the capabilities to deliver them over a long enough range to target countries on a global scale (ICBMs and submarines with ballistic capabilities). And ironically they're the five permanent members of the UN security council. I know that doesn't mean anything but I thought since the cold war countries only had nuclear weapons delivery strategies developed to attack their "allies" in a theoretical sense. I could be wrong but it's just what I thought.

 

 

 

China has ICBM's, you forget that. It's practically an "Ice War." You are also forgetting countries with medium and low-range nuclear cruise missles, which foremost of all includes our ally Britain. Many other nations have this capability. It would not be hard to design an oil tanker with missile racks and shower the US with complete destruction, while ensuring that the Strategic Air Command has absolutely nothing to retaliate on.

 

 

 

You can't break down nuclear power solely on the basis of ICBM capabilities. As stated before, Israel has racks upon racks of atomic bombs that can be delivered by aircraft.

[assassin_696]

Remember. There are many countries around the world with missiles pointed at the United States...and vice-versa.

 

 

 

Really? I don't mean to be picky but I didn't think that was the case anymore. As far as I know there are seven countries with nuclear weapons, the US, Russia, the UK, France, China, India, Pakistan and North Korea. Out of those i'd say only the first 5 have the capabilities to deliver them over a long enough range to target countries on a global scale (ICBMs and submarines with ballistic capabilities). And ironically they're the five permanent members of the UN security council. I know that doesn't mean anything but I thought since the cold war countries only had nuclear weapons delivery strategies developed to attack their "allies" in a theoretical sense. I could be wrong but it's just what I thought.

 

 

 

China has ICBM's, you forget that. It's practically an "Ice War." You are also forgetting countries with medium and low-range nuclear cruise missles, which foremost of all includes our ally Britain. Many other nations have this capability. It would not be hard to design an oil tanker with missile racks and shower the US with complete destruction, while ensuring that the Strategic Air Command has absolutely nothing to retaliate on.

 

 

 

You can't break down nuclear power solely on the basis of ICBM capabilities. As stated before, Israel has racks upon racks of atomic bombs that can be delivered by aircraft.

 

 

 

I realise that there are multiple delivery methods, but i just didn't think that there were submarines out there with their nuclear missles literally aimed at other countries. I'm sure China has plans to attack the United States in the event of a war, most countries will, but I thought since the end of the cold war they were just that, plans. Unlike in the Cold War where pretty much all America's nuclear warheads were targeted at Russia, and vice versa, and were kept ready to be launched.

[Barihawk]

You have to note that if we detect a launch towards us, we won't have time to program the guidance computers of our own missiles.

 

 

 

We have targets selected for lots of countries, in case of the worst. One missile is not pointed at just one target.

[Punc]

It's because the US and Russia are going under disarmament (which due to cost measures takes a long time). We don't want anyone else developing nuclear weapons why we are getting rid of ours. The US will take 25 years to disarm, Russia 30, and China 15 (if they continue). We are gradually getting rid of them, but we still write them into our battle plans since we still have them.

 

 

 

The why is the USA making plans to make 125 new nuclear bombs by 2022...

 

(http://washingtontimes.com/upi/20060406 ... -4096r.htm)

[Necromagus]

During the first half of the 20th century, America maintained attack strategies for Canada and Mexico too, just in case. This doesn't really surprise me...

[indy500fan]

It's because the US and Russia are going under disarmament (which due to cost measures takes a long time). We don't want anyone else developing nuclear weapons why we are getting rid of ours. The US will take 25 years to disarm, Russia 30, and China 15 (if they continue). We are gradually getting rid of them, but we still write them into our battle plans since we still have them.

 

 

 

The why is the USA making plans to make 125 new nuclear bombs by 2022...

 

(http://washingtontimes.com/upi/20060406 ... -4096r.htm)

 

 

 

yeah, i saw that article on digg (or was it fark?) the other day. the us isnt disarming at all, they are planning to make more :shock: . or they are disarming the ones that can only level parts of cities, and making ones that can level whole cities.

[Death_By_Pod]

 

I don't get why the US can have nuclear missles and no one else can? If they want to take away all the nukes, at least take out theirs. (not before a war, but remove some during war and the take all out after war)

 

 

 

 

Iran isn't a member of the Nuclear non-Proliferation Treaty.

[Blipo]

During the first half of the 20th century, America maintained attack strategies for Canada and Mexico too, just in case. This doesn't really surprise me...

 

 

 

Let's see... How many times have Canada and the US fought? And how many times have the US won? 0. Ah. That means something.

 

 

 

 

 

Actually, I'm glad to be Canadian. We're like the janitors. The US moves in and destroys everything, and we come along, pushing our broom, trying to keep the place organized. We're no threat to anyone. Weeee're safe.

[____]

Actually, I'm glad to be Canadian. We're like the janitors. The US moves in and destroys everything, and we come along, pushing our broom, trying to keep the place organized. We're no threat to anyone. Weeee're safe.

That's what Australia was like, until Howard like the idiot he is, [bleep]ed that up for us :x