What If We Got Nuked ?

If ISIL or any other terrorist organization had nukes and a viable delivery system, I would be worried, but they don't, so I'm not. Like another poster already said, the most a terrorist organization would be able to come up with is a dirty bomb, but the chances of it being detected before it was detonated are very high.

If we're gonna get nuked, it's gonna come from another nation, not a terrorist organization.
 
Right now, conservatives all over the world are scratching their heads in amazement to see American liberals protesting President Trump's immigration/travel ban. Even when the president of Syria, Bashar Assad, came out and declared that terrorists will be among the Syrian refugees, the leftist loons still go around crabbing about discrimination.

One wonders would this pathological obsession with discrimination, still grip these loons, if the jihadists nuked a few of our cities ? Or knocked out our power grid with an EMP attack ?

Would they have opposed going to war with Japan in 1941, because they might have thought we'd be discriminating against a non-white ethnic group ? Would they have said ? >> "Oh! All Japanese are not bad. It's only the radical ones. " Would they have complained that we were discriminating against Germans and Italians ?

We have been attacked dozens (if not hundreds) of times in America since the first World Trade Center attack in 1993, and thousands of Americans have been killed and maimed. What would it take to deprogram these warped robots, to realize that NOTHING is more important than national security. Sure, freedom is important, but you don't have too much freedom when you're DEAD.

Discrimination ? We discriminate between law abiding people and criminals by putting criminals in jail, while the law abiders walk free. Do liberals oppose that ? Muslims live by a doctrine (the Koran) which advocates (if not commands) the mass killing of non-Muslims, as well as the violation of scores of US laws. It also demands supremacism over all else (including the Constitution). which is illegal by the Constitution's Supremacy Clause (Article 6 Section 2, part 1), and illegal by our sedition laws.

Conservatives around the world? What "conservatives"? Kindly provide legitimate sources.

Reality: the world thinks Donald is a buffoon and other than maybe loons/neonazis like LePen don't understand wtf he's doing in office.

Well unless you count Donald's handlers in the kremlin

RW's around the world ...

images


PARTY TIME !!
It's our world. We can do as we like.
 
If ISIL or any other terrorist organization had nukes and a viable delivery system, I would be worried, but they don't, so I'm not. Like another poster already said, the most a terrorist organization would be able to come up with is a dirty bomb, but the chances of it being detected before it was detonated are very high.

If we're gonna get nuked, it's gonna come from another nation, not a terrorist organization.
Yeah, there aren't any terrorist nations, are there?
 
Right now, conservatives all over the world are scratching their heads in amazement to see American liberals protesting President Trump's immigration/travel ban. Even when the president of Syria, Bashar Assad, came out and declared that terrorists will be among the Syrian refugees, the leftist loons still go around crabbing about discrimination.

One wonders would this pathological obsession with discrimination, still grip these loons, if the jihadists nuked a few of our cities ? Or knocked out our power grid with an EMP attack ?

Would they have opposed going to war with Japan in 1941, because they might have thought we'd be discriminating against a non-white ethnic group ? Would they have said ? >> "Oh! All Japanese are not bad. It's only the radical ones. " Would they have complained that we were discriminating against Germans and Italians ?
So many logical fallacies, so little time...

Let me make it very simple so that even you can understand it, IF YOU WANT TO. Which you won't. I have no idea why I am wasting my time.

But here goes...

I have no problem going to war against ISISBOOMBAH. No problem at all. We've been kicking their asses for some time, contrary to what your propaganda sources are telling you as you cower under your bed.

I do have a problem with going to war against the people FLEEING the terrorists. And that is what you pants shitting cowards are doing, and you will burn in hell forever for that.

The refugees probably hate the terrorists more than you do. And they are probably an excellent source of intel.

And you spit in their faces and want to throw them back into the teeth of the terrorists.

You are a very special kind of bigoted asshole.
 
If ISIL or any other terrorist organization had nukes and a viable delivery system, I would be worried, but they don't, so I'm not. Like another poster already said, the most a terrorist organization would be able to come up with is a dirty bomb, but the chances of it being detected before it was detonated are very high.

If we're gonna get nuked, it's gonna come from another nation, not a terrorist organization.
Yeah, there aren't any terrorist nations, are there?

I'm pretty sure that we would have an idea when an attack would come from another country. What terrorist nations are you thinking of specifically?
 
Right now, conservatives all over the world are scratching their heads in amazement to see American liberals protesting President Trump's immigration/travel ban. Even when the president of Syria, Bashar Assad, came out and declared that terrorists will be among the Syrian refugees, the leftist loons still go around crabbing about discrimination.

One wonders would this pathological obsession with discrimination, still grip these loons, if the jihadists nuked a few of our cities ? Or knocked out our power grid with an EMP attack ?

Would they have opposed going to war with Japan in 1941, because they might have thought we'd be discriminating against a non-white ethnic group ? Would they have said ? >> "Oh! All Japanese are not bad. It's only the radical ones. " Would they have complained that we were discriminating against Germans and Italians ?

We have been attacked dozens (if not hundreds) of times in America since the first World Trade Center attack in 1993, and thousands of Americans have been killed and maimed. What would it take to deprogram these warped robots, to realize that NOTHING is more important than national security. Sure, freedom is important, but you don't have too much freedom when you're DEAD.

Discrimination ? We discriminate between law abiding people and criminals by putting criminals in jail, while the law abiders walk free. Do liberals oppose that ? Muslims live by a doctrine (the Koran) which advocates (if not commands) the mass killing of non-Muslims, as well as the violation of scores of US laws. It also demands supremacism over all else (including the Constitution). which is illegal by the Constitution's Supremacy Clause (Article 6 Section 2, part 1), and illegal by our sedition laws.

If ISIL had nukes and a viable delivery system, you might have had a point, but the trouble is, they don't. Nuking a city could be done via bringing one in on a truck, but the chances are almost 100 percent that the radioactivity would give it away before it could be detonated.

As far as taking out the grid via EMP? Not only would you need a medium yield nuclear weapon, but you would also need a missile delivery system that would put it 10 miles above the middle of the USA.

ISIL has neither.
North Korea and eventually Iran will have the capability. North Korea would sell the technology because of there none existent economy and Iran because state sponsored terrorism is what they do.
 
Right now, conservatives all over the world are scratching their heads in amazement to see American liberals protesting President Trump's immigration/travel ban. Even when the president of Syria, Bashar Assad, came out and declared that terrorists will be among the Syrian refugees, the leftist loons still go around crabbing about discrimination.

One wonders would this pathological obsession with discrimination, still grip these loons, if the jihadists nuked a few of our cities ? Or knocked out our power grid with an EMP attack ?

Would they have opposed going to war with Japan in 1941, because they might have thought we'd be discriminating against a non-white ethnic group ? Would they have said ? >> "Oh! All Japanese are not bad. It's only the radical ones. " Would they have complained that we were discriminating against Germans and Italians ?

We have been attacked dozens (if not hundreds) of times in America since the first World Trade Center attack in 1993, and thousands of Americans have been killed and maimed. What would it take to deprogram these warped robots, to realize that NOTHING is more important than national security. Sure, freedom is important, but you don't have too much freedom when you're DEAD.

Discrimination ? We discriminate between law abiding people and criminals by putting criminals in jail, while the law abiders walk free. Do liberals oppose that ? Muslims live by a doctrine (the Koran) which advocates (if not commands) the mass killing of non-Muslims, as well as the violation of scores of US laws. It also demands supremacism over all else (including the Constitution). which is illegal by the Constitution's Supremacy Clause (Article 6 Section 2, part 1), and illegal by our sedition laws.

If ISIL had nukes and a viable delivery system, you might have had a point, but the trouble is, they don't. Nuking a city could be done via bringing one in on a truck, but the chances are almost 100 percent that the radioactivity would give it away before it could be detonated.

As far as taking out the grid via EMP? Not only would you need a medium yield nuclear weapon, but you would also need a missile delivery system that would put it 10 miles above the middle of the USA.

ISIL has neither.
North Korea and eventually Iran will have the capability. North Korea would sell the technology because of there none existent economy and Iran because state sponsored terrorism is what they do.

Iran won't have the capability for the next 10 years, and N. Korea, although they have a leader who is even crazier than Trump and is prone to fly off the handle at the slightest thing, they don't have a military big enough to take us on. And, if N. Korea throws the first blows, then China won't have any reason to help them, meaning we would have made them a US territory within a year of attack.
 
I predicted 15 years ago that it would happen within 20-25 years.

What exactly was your prediction, and what country started it?
A terrorist group, no nation other than the one who provided the technology. The predict was that a nuclear device would be detonated somewhere in the continental United States.

Terrorist groups don't have the connections to get nukes, and even if they did, what nuclear capable country in their right mind would give it to them? They would be concerned that it could be used against them, as most nuclear powers are non Islamic nations.
 
Trump tweeted that “the United States must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes.”

1) President Shitstain needs his twitter account shoved up his ass
2) every country in the world cringes at the thought of an arms race
3) the comment was a 12 on the 10 scale of ironic stupidity
4) see #1
5) Fuck Trump
 
Right now, conservatives all over the world are scratching their heads in amazement to see American liberals protesting President Trump's immigration/travel ban. Even when the president of Syria, Bashar Assad, came out and declared that terrorists will be among the Syrian refugees, the leftist loons still go around crabbing about discrimination.

One wonders would this pathological obsession with discrimination, still grip these loons, if the jihadists nuked a few of our cities ? Or knocked out our power grid with an EMP attack ?

Would they have opposed going to war with Japan in 1941, because they might have thought we'd be discriminating against a non-white ethnic group ? Would they have said ? >> "Oh! All Japanese are not bad. It's only the radical ones. " Would they have complained that we were discriminating against Germans and Italians ?

We have been attacked dozens (if not hundreds) of times in America since the first World Trade Center attack in 1993, and thousands of Americans have been killed and maimed. What would it take to deprogram these warped robots, to realize that NOTHING is more important than national security. Sure, freedom is important, but you don't have too much freedom when you're DEAD.

Discrimination ? We discriminate between law abiding people and criminals by putting criminals in jail, while the law abiders walk free. Do liberals oppose that ? Muslims live by a doctrine (the Koran) which advocates (if not commands) the mass killing of non-Muslims, as well as the violation of scores of US laws. It also demands supremacism over all else (including the Constitution). which is illegal by the Constitution's Supremacy Clause (Article 6 Section 2, part 1), and illegal by our sedition laws.

If ISIL had nukes and a viable delivery system, you might have had a point, but the trouble is, they don't. Nuking a city could be done via bringing one in on a truck, but the chances are almost 100 percent that the radioactivity would give it away before it could be detonated.

As far as taking out the grid via EMP? Not only would you need a medium yield nuclear weapon, but you would also need a missile delivery system that would put it 10 miles above the middle of the USA.

ISIL has neither.
North Korea and eventually Iran will have the capability. North Korea would sell the technology because of there none existent economy and Iran because state sponsored terrorism is what they do.

Iran won't have the capability for the next 10 years, and N. Korea, although they have a leader who is even crazier than Trump and is prone to fly off the handle at the slightest thing, they don't have a military big enough to take us on. And, if N. Korea throws the first blows, then China won't have any reason to help them, meaning we would have made them a US territory within a year of attack.
"military big enough to take us on."
Not in the long run but they could take over most of South Korea before we could even begin to really fight back. NK has somewhere around a million troops close to the DMZ. We called our troops up there speed bumps because they were supposed to hold back NK for only 30 minutes. If you believe the Chinese would sit back while a large Army gathered on there boarders you really don't understand the situation.
 
I predicted 15 years ago that it would happen within 20-25 years.

What exactly was your prediction, and what country started it?
A terrorist group, no nation other than the one who provided the technology. The predict was that a nuclear device would be detonated somewhere in the continental United States.

Terrorist groups don't have the connections to get nukes, and even if they did, what nuclear capable country in their right mind would give it to them? They would be concerned that it could be used against them, as most nuclear powers are non Islamic nations.
Iran and North Korea just off the top of my head.
 
I predicted 15 years ago that it would happen within 20-25 years.

What exactly was your prediction, and what country started it?
A terrorist group, no nation other than the one who provided the technology. The predict was that a nuclear device would be detonated somewhere in the continental United States.

Terrorist groups don't have the connections to get nukes, and even if they did, what nuclear capable country in their right mind would give it to them? They would be concerned that it could be used against them, as most nuclear powers are non Islamic nations.
Oh and Pakistan.
 
I predicted 15 years ago that it would happen within 20-25 years.

What exactly was your prediction, and what country started it?
A terrorist group, no nation other than the one who provided the technology. The predict was that a nuclear device would be detonated somewhere in the continental United States.

Terrorist groups don't have the connections to get nukes, and even if they did, what nuclear capable country in their right mind would give it to them? They would be concerned that it could be used against them, as most nuclear powers are non Islamic nations.
Oh and Pakistan.

The government of Pakistan would probably be the last one to give terrorists nukes. Why? ISIL hates their government and wants to make them part of the Caliphate.
 
Right now, conservatives all over the world are scratching their heads in amazement to see American liberals protesting President Trump's immigration/travel ban. Even when the president of Syria, Bashar Assad, came out and declared that terrorists will be among the Syrian refugees, the leftist loons still go around crabbing about discrimination.

One wonders would this pathological obsession with discrimination, still grip these loons, if the jihadists nuked a few of our cities ? Or knocked out our power grid with an EMP attack ?

Would they have opposed going to war with Japan in 1941, because they might have thought we'd be discriminating against a non-white ethnic group ? Would they have said ? >> "Oh! All Japanese are not bad. It's only the radical ones. " Would they have complained that we were discriminating against Germans and Italians ?

We have been attacked dozens (if not hundreds) of times in America since the first World Trade Center attack in 1993, and thousands of Americans have been killed and maimed. What would it take to deprogram these warped robots, to realize that NOTHING is more important than national security. Sure, freedom is important, but you don't have too much freedom when you're DEAD.

Discrimination ? We discriminate between law abiding people and criminals by putting criminals in jail, while the law abiders walk free. Do liberals oppose that ? Muslims live by a doctrine (the Koran) which advocates (if not commands) the mass killing of non-Muslims, as well as the violation of scores of US laws. It also demands supremacism over all else (including the Constitution). which is illegal by the Constitution's Supremacy Clause (Article 6 Section 2, part 1), and illegal by our sedition laws.

If ISIL had nukes and a viable delivery system, you might have had a point, but the trouble is, they don't. Nuking a city could be done via bringing one in on a truck, but the chances are almost 100 percent that the radioactivity would give it away before it could be detonated.

As far as taking out the grid via EMP? Not only would you need a medium yield nuclear weapon, but you would also need a missile delivery system that would put it 10 miles above the middle of the USA.

ISIL has neither.
Every city in the US doesn't monitor for radiation and one ship in a port would be enough.
 
Right now, conservatives all over the world are scratching their heads in amazement to see American liberals protesting President Trump's immigration/travel ban. Even when the president of Syria, Bashar Assad, came out and declared that terrorists will be among the Syrian refugees, the leftist loons still go around crabbing about discrimination.

One wonders would this pathological obsession with discrimination, still grip these loons, if the jihadists nuked a few of our cities ? Or knocked out our power grid with an EMP attack ?

Would they have opposed going to war with Japan in 1941, because they might have thought we'd be discriminating against a non-white ethnic group ? Would they have said ? >> "Oh! All Japanese are not bad. It's only the radical ones. " Would they have complained that we were discriminating against Germans and Italians ?

We have been attacked dozens (if not hundreds) of times in America since the first World Trade Center attack in 1993, and thousands of Americans have been killed and maimed. What would it take to deprogram these warped robots, to realize that NOTHING is more important than national security. Sure, freedom is important, but you don't have too much freedom when you're DEAD.

Discrimination ? We discriminate between law abiding people and criminals by putting criminals in jail, while the law abiders walk free. Do liberals oppose that ? Muslims live by a doctrine (the Koran) which advocates (if not commands) the mass killing of non-Muslims, as well as the violation of scores of US laws. It also demands supremacism over all else (including the Constitution). which is illegal by the Constitution's Supremacy Clause (Article 6 Section 2, part 1), and illegal by our sedition laws.

If ISIL had nukes and a viable delivery system, you might have had a point, but the trouble is, they don't. Nuking a city could be done via bringing one in on a truck, but the chances are almost 100 percent that the radioactivity would give it away before it could be detonated.

As far as taking out the grid via EMP? Not only would you need a medium yield nuclear weapon, but you would also need a missile delivery system that would put it 10 miles above the middle of the USA.

ISIL has neither.
Every city in the US doesn't monitor for radiation and one ship in a port would be enough.

Think about what you just said. Yes, you are correct, not every city has radiation monitors, but most of the large ones do, and commercial ports check for radiation when the ships go through customs.
 
They would blame Trump. No matter what happens, blame Trump, or his wife. Blame Trump. My dog shit on the rug. Blame Trump. My neighbor pissed in his yard. Blame Trump. My dick fell off. Blame Trump. A Saudi got his goat pregnant. Blame Trump. Joe Blows car ran out of gas. Blame Trump. Chili gives me heartburn. Blame Trump. A 45 year old dam falls apart. Blame Trump. Hitler drank water. Blame Trump.

Kinda like what you guys did with Obama for the past 8 years.
Who?
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top