Do you think a nuclear missile will ever be fired in anger..
Discussion
Possibly. For example, North Korea is very upset about the USA'so recent attack on Syria and has made noises about a nuclear retaliation being justified. Whether or not the current incumbent is loopy enough to follow through with the rhetoric is a different matter. But tin pot unhinged dictators are ten a penny. One might wish to confirm their legendary status in history.
Not by us. Interestingly British nuclear weapons don't have a permissive action link like the American system, it's down to the Submarine Captain to launch when given the order. International law would seemingly prohibit the use of nuclear weapons except in extreme self defence, though 'rogue' states aren't particularly bothered by that obviously.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Court_...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Court_...
BIANCO said:
Hope not, politicians are cowards it's the reason they won't just kill Assad in Syria. If they kill another world leader it makes them open tragets. Nukes meaning they die to so they won't use them unless absolutely? the last resort. Well I hope so.
You seem to be ignoring Saddam being killed, Gaddafi being killed....I think we'll see Putin using some nutty Muslim to detonate a dirty nuke in the US, with the U.S. then being obliged to nuke a Muslim country it doesn't like in retaliation.
Edited by Countdown on Saturday 8th April 23:25
Not while there's a hole in my arse.
Tripartite understandings between those who hold the biggest nuclear arsenals (US, Russia and China) maintain an implicit status quo where no superpower will instigate a nuclear attack. The rest of the nuclear nations know that any unilateral action on their part will be met with massive repercussions from the top three, regardless of affiliations. India & Pakistan won't do it as they'll both suffer the fallout (physically and politically). North Korea are more likely to blow themselves up than anyone else.
If a 'dirty bomb' were detonated by a rogue belligerent then every man and his dog would hunt them down: It's political suicide.
Tripartite understandings between those who hold the biggest nuclear arsenals (US, Russia and China) maintain an implicit status quo where no superpower will instigate a nuclear attack. The rest of the nuclear nations know that any unilateral action on their part will be met with massive repercussions from the top three, regardless of affiliations. India & Pakistan won't do it as they'll both suffer the fallout (physically and politically). North Korea are more likely to blow themselves up than anyone else.
If a 'dirty bomb' were detonated by a rogue belligerent then every man and his dog would hunt them down: It's political suicide.
mrtwisty said:
jdw100 said:
Yes, I can see a situation arrising whereby someone bypasses a road closure and drives onto the course of a LIVE MARATHON!
A nuclear strike could be used in that circumstance.
WTF are you gibbering about you simpleton?A nuclear strike could be used in that circumstance.
I will not remember your kind words!
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff