Possiblity of a total nuke war during the cold war

"Usually blowing yourself up on a bus full of civilians doesn't make for very good PR.
I could educate you about why that is the case with North Korea but I feel that it's better not to educate you.
Somalia is a long way off from China. You really have no idea who those guys are, do you?"


Its funny how you just danced around my whole statement about Middle East and Africa, and instead tried to take a cheap shot at Somalia and I. You my friend are the one that needs to be educated, you don't see Iranians blowing themselves up, Iraqis were never blowing themselves up before your so called "operation Iraqi freedom" lol, Somalis don't go blowing themselves up, Sudanese don't go blowing themselves up etc....

But in your poor attempt to distort and try to distract from my argument you try to take a poor shot at me and my country. North Korea is more of a danger than Iran or Somalia, it is more erratic and irresponsible than Iran or Somalia, they built a nuke, tested a nuke, they regularly fire missiles over Japan and into the Pacific, they went into Japan itself and kidnapped Japanese citizens as part of their training. So really lets look at North Korea and the Iran, anyone who sets aside their hatred of Iran or Muslim countries can see which poses the greater danger. But America sits down with them without preconditions or dictates while they threaten and taunt the world; while Iran, Iraq, Syria and such are attacked, threatend with military action and told their won't be negotiations.

Regardless of you distortions and denials, my statement is true, America and Israel have designs for the Middle East that is why they attack directly or in directly 1 Muslim country after another, while countries such as North Korea is negotiated with. So unless you have a different theory or can disprove the statements I made in the previous post, I suggest you go find something better to do instead of personal attack.
 
Last edited:
"
1. Simple, were the American forces that raided Mogadishu under UN command or authority? No. The Americans though they were their to support the UN, I must criticize them that they operated outside the UN command and they carried out missions without UN authorization, now that is something you can't deny no matter how you twist it.


2. I don't have an issue with any of the UN forces Saudi, Malay, Egypt or Canada you mentioned because they operated within the limits of the UN perimeters and UN authority, they didn't raid Mogadishu or carry out missions without UN authorizations like U.S. which caused the deaths of thousands of innocent Somali civilians.


3. The point still stands that the American mission was to support the UN, they overstepped their perimeters and raid someone's else capital which cause the deaths of brave America soldiers and Somali civilians. The point still stands that those same warlords that America was trying to capture such as Aidid senior, they are today propping up in Mogadishu such as Aidid junior and his likes. Hypocrisy at its best, that is all I have to say.



3. Well your bubble seems pretty distorted to me my friend, you may have been in Mogadishu as a low level Marine soldier but the facts are that American forces in Somalia were in never under UN command and never had authorization to raid Mogadishu, I know this for a fact and pretty familiar with this incident. You know what makes me laugh till this day? Its the hypocrisy of the American foreign policy towards Somalia. You guys are today propping up and installing the same warlords that you faught against in 1993 in Somalia.


4. I respect America for their democracy and freedom, but I am still smart enough to realize when they doing wrong and call them out for it. My only aim for working for the Somali delegation to the UN is to help my people attain freedom, independence and safety. I believe America can be a better force for good and equality if they can stop with the hypocrisy, double standards, and bias towards Muslim countries.


1. Duh I have been explaining to you for how many posts that there were two seperate Operations with two seperate command structures. You are the one thats been denying it. Care to spin again?

2. Nor did the US Forces assigned to Operation Restore Hope II. Nor did anyone until UN troops began to be ambushed and killed and food distribution points assaulted and the UN effort put at risk by Aidid when he finally figured out it wasn't Burger King and he wasn't going to have "his way."

3. Once again two different operations, two different commands. One under the UN, one not. How is this so hard to understand? Really where are your comprehension skills?
Yeah it's just the US assisting the Transitional Goverment. Not the UN or several other organizations just the US errrrrr I mean Great Satan.

4. Just like the last 15-16 years right? As long as the world pumps in aid and supplies on Somalias terms. "Just give the food to us. We will get it where it needs to go (wink, wink, nudge, nudge). Hasn't worked in the past.
 
I dont mind that we have gone off-toppic, because this is a fatr better toppic, and the other one was daed in the water.

The problem is United, that your not getting the general problem. The general problem is not that Israel is using military strength to force the Arabs into co-existance, it is that the Arabs refused to make peace again and again. 1948 would not have happened if the Arabs accepted the UN partition. The Arabs lost the war and instead of making peace with Israel decided to makea temporary cease fire. The Arab countries continued to militarize, espcially Egypt. They stated openly that they will wipe Israel off the map. The Egyptians lost another war in 1956, this time having pissed off France Britain and more over forcing Israel to act before the Egyptian army gained complete superirity. This more or less repeated itself in 1967, when Israel defeated all of its neighboures within 6 days. Israel againg offered peace, but the Arabs said, and I qoute "No to negotiation, No to peace, and No to recognition of Iasrael as a state". They fought 2 more wars with Israel before it was clear to Sadat After 1973, that he simply cannot win this. So he offered peace for land, and guess what, he got it. He got it. The minute a capable Arab leader decides he really wants peace with Israel it happens. If the Palestinians and the Syrians wanted peace and were willing to compremise they would have it 20 years ago. The problem is the Palestinians like to play silly games, and the Syrians think that negotiations is somthing you do after the other side already giveas you everything you want. So on the whole I say again, the moment these people start talking like peace lovers and not like mass murderers, we will talk to them. It has been done before, and Israel has peace with two countries that it fought bitterly. If on the other hand, you expect Israel to weaken itself as a sign of good will, your insane. The only reason Egypt made peace is that they lost faith about winning a war against my country. The only reason Syria has not attacked Israel for the last 35 years is that they are afraid. And yes, its good that their affraid. I like that their affraid, and I am hopefull that they will keep being affraid. Maybe theill get smart and stop ****ing around with us.
 
United - kindly ask your self this: who in their right minds would want control of Africa, and the Arab countries? That would be like wanting to continuously bang your head on the sharp corner of the table. We seem to spend most of our time trying to feed Africa, and supporting Aids etc., programmes. Israel has to try building a wall to keep its neighbours OUT. They have quite enough Arabs thanks, and they don't have apologize to anyone for breathing. America and Israel have one aim in both scenarios - PEACE, a dirty word as far as their enemies are concerned.
 
Last edited:
Interesting discussion but would you guys please stop generalizing the term Muslims? There are well over a billion people practicing the religion of Islam and it is simply the second largest faith in the world after Christianity. Needless to say, Muslims come from many different countries, ethnicities, languages and backgrounds and they all have different opinions about the West and about ideals like democracy, personal freedoms, women's rights, etc. When you call all Muslims violent or terrorists you put them all in the same bag and it only helps in making new enemies.

Turkey, for example, is a country with a Muslim population but it has always been a secular, democratic republic, a long time member of NATO, EU candidate, G20 industrial member and has always been a staunch ally of the West. It was pretty much America's only bargaining chip when the Russians were driving ICBM trucks in Cuba. It's also the only dependable ally and partner of Israel and the Jewish people in the greater Middle East area. Not all Muslims are the enemy. So, please stop generalizing. :wink:
 
Lol, no, I don't mean you specifically Sherman. I'm just saying. Throwing the idea in the middle in case someone might generalize. The thread is kind of evolving to that end result. Otherwise so far it's a perfectly fine discussion. :smil:
 
just for the record, I have nothing against muslims. In case anyone thought so. I do have somthing against terrorists, if they are muslim, jewish, christian or whatever.
 
just for the record, I have nothing against muslims. In case anyone thought so. I do have somthing against terrorists, if they are muslim, jewish, christian or whatever.
Exactly, me too. Terrorism is a global problem, and there ara many different sponsors of it from almost all religious and national backgrounds. And I think the issue can only be solved once and for all by a world-wide collaboration.

About the topic... Should this current Russo-American tension over Georgia, Black Sea, US Missile Defense, Ukraine's NATO membership, etc eventually turn into a new Cold War, would you say that the probability of a nuclear exchange be more (or less?) than that of the previous Cold War?
 
"lol....

How about when Achmadinijad, Nassralla, and the rest of you friends stop calling Israel and the USA the Big Devil and the Small Devil...Maybe than the Americans and Israelis will stop having to bust arab balls every 10 years in avarage?"-Sherman

We have digressed from the original topic of the possibility of nuclear war in the cold war. But I will say this..... the bandwagon against Muslims, the character defamation against Islam, the invasions of Muslim countries is not all a coincidence. This is a military strategy to control Muslim countries. The West/Israel has 2 aims in the Middle East, A. control the Middle East for Israeli designs B. Control Middle East resources for Western exploitation. Israel has nothing much to really do with Africa but I want to mention Africa also to point out that the West has 2 aim in Africa, A. to control the natural resources for Western exploitation and B. Squeeze out China. In the next paragraph I will restate a point I have made earlier in my other post that you may disagree with Sherman, but deep down inside you know its true and can't deny that this is what is being done in the Middle East. Anyone that puts 2 and 2 together, clearly studies and watches what is being done in the Middle East, they will agree that this is the American-Israeli plan in order to gain hegemony in that region. Here it goes.....

Lets look at the Middle East; Egypt and Jordan are no longer a threat they made peace with Israel, Iraq is eliminated as a military obstacle in the drive to have Israel reign over the Middle East, and now they want to eliminate Iran as the other major obstacle to Israeli supremacy dictates in the region. Then after Iran is eliminated Syria will be left alone and vulnerable surrounded by Israel or American leaning regimes, and they will be left with 2 choices A. Sign peace with Israel on Israeli terms or B. You will be eliminated the same way as Iraq and Iran. Then Israel will have reign supreme over the whole Middle East. You see I believe its not a coincidence that America is going after one Muslim country after another who had nothing to do with 9/11 under the false pretexts of war on terrorism and nukes. North Korea tested a nukes and the missiles capable of carrying them, but America never once stepped up to them militarily in order to control their nuke building. But they militarily go after Muslim countries that have no nukes, while they make peace and sit at the table with North Korea as equal partners. If they can negotiate without preconditions and dictates with the erratic, WMD proliferating, Hermite regime of North Korea, they can't negotiate with Iran without preconditions and dictates which is more responsible and less erratic than the North Korea regime?

Now lets look at Africa..... The West wants to establish control over African resources and strategic points in Africa. Egypt controls the strategic Suez Canal and is allied with America, Algeria sits on massive oil reserves and is pro-West, Morocco sits on strategic location near the Gibraltar and Europe and is pro-West, Tunisia is pro-West, Libya with its oil is pacified and de-fanged and Qaddafi gets to keep his power instead of getting overthrown. Sudan's president is being charged with genocide and Sudan is on its way to regime change by the West in order to gain control of its oil and strategic location, a puppet regime is installed in Somalia so that when it is pacified the West will gain access to Somali natural resources and Somali is located in the strategic horn of Africa. South Africa is pro-West. So their you go America wants to squeez out China and gain Africa's resources and strategic locations, so African countries establish relations with America on their own accord, and those that don't establish relations and realign they get destabilized and regime changed, that is why Qaddafi choose to get de-fanged instead of overthrown.

Now I know we have digressed from the original topic, but that is all I have to say, you guys can shut your eyes, be in denials, but fact of the matter is that this is the American-Israeli plan for the Middle East, and America's plan for Africa I have also stated. That is why an African command is being established which never even was established at the height of the cold war.

The point you make about the U.S. exploiting countries for whatever purpose, stealing their oil and squeezing out China has some truth to it when it comes to Iraq. But its not as simple as all that. The Bush administration were basically setting up their friends in Halliburton and other large oil companies they had shares in. But the American people are far from stupid and they saw through the WMD argument and saw the greed at work on the other side. That is one of the main reasons, Barrick Obama is the next president. Bush, Rumsfield and especially Cheney should all be put in the dock at the Haigue in Belgium on war crimes charges. But we know this will not happen.
But I also believe your other arguments do not hold much water. To call Iran responsible is, I am afraid to say, laughable. North Korea is coming around because they realize they don't have a choice. You say they are being treated as equal partners. Thats just not the case. Everyone is trying to formulate a plan which will help the North Korean people for the dismantling of their nuclear program.
And where do you get this idea that the U.S. and Isreal are working toward some secret dismantling of Islamic states. The last time i read something like this, I believe it was an article on the protocals of Zion or some such nonsense about a Jewish conspiracy to take over the world. Yep, real intelligent stuff.
I don't think anyone is defaming Islam. They may be defaming the radical Islamists who scream Jihad every 5 minutes and believe its all right to murder anyone as long as they are infidels. Those are the acts of genocidal psychopaths who obviously do not think for themselves.
You mention Sudan's president and point out ,the west is after him for war crimes. Anybody with half a brain should be after this man and his cohorts. They have systematically perpetrated genocide on Sudan's entire African population. Is this for the greater good of Islam? China supports this thug because the Sudanese gov. buys arms from them and they have some oil and other deals cooking. China has quite a record recently for supporting monsters as long as a buck can be made. And we all know they are not the only super_power who does this.
Please understand this one thing. Israel is not going away. Israel has every right to exist and flourish. When the misguided goverments, such as Iran, Syria, Somalia and a few others keep rattling their swords over Israel you are just being mulish and no good can come from it. I do not mean this as an insult, but none of these country's has the Military and /or strategic sophistication to take Israel out.
Also most people in the West do not understand the radical Islamist common view of dealing with the west as infidels. They also do not understand your'e Sharia law which westerner's view as harsh and sadistic. Everytime someone says something the radicals disagree with strongly, a Fatwah or death sentance is called. It appears to be incredibly insane and rather childish. In radical Islam there also seems to be a strong resistance to modernity.
But please believe me when I say no one has anything against Muslims.
Do I have something against Radical Muslims who view me as a dog and infidel and think its alright to take my life?
You bet I do...
 
Last edited:
Off the top of my head.

I dread to think what the outcome would have been, possibly humanity on the verge of extinction. Some would have survived the initial attacks, maybe the dead would have been the lucky ones.
 
United Somalia - your recent post is absolute nonsense. You accuse Israel, with America'a help, of seeking peace, like the long-held and respected peace with Egypt and Jordan; terrible thing that - seeking peace. We can't have that, can we!

And with the breath you accuse them of reigning supreme over all the region. How and why? Why would they wish to control the uncontrollable. They are a democracy, whilst the others have a preference for despotic rulers.

How on earth you can be the representative of Somalia at the UN is beyond me. You would do better to turn your attentions to your own hell-hole, Somalia, which the UN has condemned so vehemently.
 
"Usually blowing yourself up on a bus full of civilians doesn't make for very good PR.
I could educate you about why that is the case with North Korea but I feel that it's better not to educate you.
Somalia is a long way off from China. You really have no idea who those guys are, do you?"


Its funny how you just danced around my whole statement about Middle East and Africa, and instead tried to take a cheap shot at Somalia and I. You my friend are the one that needs to be educated, you don't see Iranians blowing themselves up, Iraqis were never blowing themselves up before your so called "operation Iraqi freedom" lol, Somalis don't go blowing themselves up, Sudanese don't go blowing themselves up etc....

But in your poor attempt to distort and try to distract from my argument you try to take a poor shot at me and my country. North Korea is more of a danger than Iran or Somalia, it is more erratic and irresponsible than Iran or Somalia, they built a nuke, tested a nuke, they regularly fire missiles over Japan and into the Pacific, they went into Japan itself and kidnapped Japanese citizens as part of their training. So really lets look at North Korea and the Iran, anyone who sets aside their hatred of Iran or Muslim countries can see which poses the greater danger. But America sits down with them without preconditions or dictates while they threaten and taunt the world; while Iran, Iraq, Syria and such are attacked, threatend with military action and told their won't be negotiations.

Regardless of you distortions and denials, my statement is true, America and Israel have designs for the Middle East that is why they attack directly or in directly 1 Muslim country after another, while countries such as North Korea is negotiated with. So unless you have a different theory or can disprove the statements I made in the previous post, I suggest you go find something better to do instead of personal attack.

Iran is led by a nutcase thats gonna hang hinself, North Korea wil be negoated with to avoid a nucular conflict.

And your Pirates are where today?
 
I dont think the Russian or Americans would press the button...


you know, after watching this "wag the dog" thing thats been going on for a few years...i wonder if someone thought it was worth some money to them that they would do it.:?:
 
"Usually blowing yourself up on a bus full of civilians doesn't make for very good PR.
I could educate you about why that is the case with North Korea but I feel that it's better not to educate you.
Somalia is a long way off from China. You really have no idea who those guys are, do you?"

Its funny how you just danced around my whole statement about Middle East and Africa, and instead tried to take a cheap shot at Somalia and I. You my friend are the one that needs to be educated, you don't see Iranians blowing themselves up, Iraqis were never blowing themselves up before your so called "operation Iraqi freedom" lol, Somalis don't go blowing themselves up, Sudanese don't go blowing themselves up etc....

But in your poor attempt to distort and try to distract from my argument you try to take a poor shot at me and my country. North Korea is more of a danger than Iran or Somalia, it is more erratic and irresponsible than Iran or Somalia, they built a nuke, tested a nuke, they regularly fire missiles over Japan and into the Pacific, they went into Japan itself and kidnapped Japanese citizens as part of their training. So really lets look at North Korea and the Iran, anyone who sets aside their hatred of Iran or Muslim countries can see which poses the greater danger. But America sits down with them without preconditions or dictates while they threaten and taunt the world; while Iran, Iraq, Syria and such are attacked, threatend with military action and told their won't be negotiations.

Regardless of you distortions and denials, my statement is true, America and Israel have designs for the Middle East that is why they attack directly or in directly 1 Muslim country after another, while countries such as North Korea is negotiated with. So unless you have a different theory or can disprove the statements I made in the previous post, I suggest you go find something better to do instead of personal attack.


Really because youre just sitting there attacking the US and its Allies repeatedly. Israel is always being attacked my an Arabs every so often, and the only 2 countries the US ever attacked directly or inderectly was Iraq 2 times, and Iran through Iraq when Saddam was "working" for the US.
 
I can remember training for total proliferation and it was ignorant.We would discuss how we would put our shelter half and poncho over the fox hole and cover my self from the fallout.This is of course after we calculated the flash and bang margin of time.The Good Old Army and their training.I understand they finally realized the ignorance.I am looking for 2/75th Ranger Veterans and 3/5th Cav Vets from Ft Lewis Central America Explorers as I call them and Korea Vets and Germany Vets... I was busy.1974 to 1982. The Cold War and End of Vietnam era
 
According to the US and USSR doctrines a nuclear war could best be prevented if neither side could not expect to survive as a state of full function; in other words a full nuclear exchange would take place.

If the USSR pushed the button first the US would quickly respond. All major cities, ports, military installations and oil fields etc would be removed from planet earth in a matter of minutes causing hundreds of millions of deaths, devastating damage to the enviroment and the ozone layer causing nuclear winter and nuclear summer hurting the entire planet.

Those whose so fortunate to survive would face so large problems with radiation and nuclear waste polluting water, crops, buildings and so on making life so hard that only a handfull would survive in the most remote areas of the continents.

Who would have won? Won what...?

Edit: Worst case scenario - ie total nuclear war.

On the other hand - damages will be less severe if a limited amount of nuclear weapons were used for a limted period of time - but the way I see this scenario would be the desire for removal of either USA or USSR from the planet.

This is the likely scenario and probably,given circumstances at the time,targets would include more than just the USA and USSR,so the majority of the planet would have been badly contaminated and in vast areas populations and infrastructure and food supply would be minimal.

No winner.

Both sides came to REALIZE the "mutually assured destruction" was not even a strategic option ...there wasn't a scenario that ended well even if one side had enough left to...for a short time..claim victory. The cockroaches might be able to say they won.

Both sides...for at least 20 years,had realized that both sides were bluffing and both sides knew it. THAT is where things get complicated.

What if, assuming the nuclear weapons WERE unusable...a conventional but massive full on war began in Europe? Is it possible to uses a "little nuke" as a battlefield weapon? If so,what if the other side uses a bigger "little nuke"?

What is the threshold? How do you maintain the hair trigger on a nuclear holocaust during a full on war?

Maybe in part because there were no answers the Nato/Warsaw Pact big WW III never happened. It had no chance of being COST EFFECTIVE.

The risks meanwhile, were infinite.
 
As for Somalia...that is currently the last place on earth anyone cares to dominate,be in,or fool with.

It's like a swamp with a pack of mad dogs. There's not much value to the swamp and the mad dogs make it not worth it to BE there to even think about what possible use that swamp might be.

Somalia has a LOT of armed lawless and irrational people. Somalia has a lot of HOT deserts and an uneducated underfed population. there's no real infrastructure or assets or stability. You could point to a place and promise me there's oil there if I want to drill a well...sorry..no investor will take the risk. No crew will be willing to drill there.

Isreal has "issues" with countries that wage war on them for a half century,who encourage children to become human bombs to murder children. Were there no attack upon Isreal, Isreal would have had no presence in the West bank or Gaza. Were the Palestinians willing to be peaceful neighbors,they'd have ruled themselves on their own lands 25 yr ago...which would be the first time in history.

Isreal " dominating" the middle East? Isreal has no real control or influence in any of the arab/moslem areas near them. Generally, it's understood by the more practical folks that the rest of the world won't like a lot more foolishness. So...shut up and grow up.

It seems there are many kinds of muslim. The ones I LOATHE are those who are an irrational sadistic,delusional and ignorant cult. They take the concept of Nazi Atrocity...further than the Nazis would. They imagine their god rewards murder,brutality and oppression. They have no honor,no morals and yet cling to prudish things that seem medievil. They profess that the Koran is sacred then feel free to twist and distort it to justify the worst of sins and the worst of crimes.

And they brainwash so many in closed and primitive communities where but for the AK 47 it's still the 17th century.

Those, the Jihadists, the terrorists, are an insult to those Moslems who DO want to live good and holy lives. They are doing NO favors to Moslems or anyone. They relish power and cruelty and greed and by doing evil in the name of Islam, they dirty it. I'm surprised they get away with that. Other cultures and religions would never allow themselves to be so badly represented.
 
Back
Top