Shoutbox

Refresh History
  • littlebit: Makes sense.
    July 16, 2017, 04:40:28 AM
  • Lepard LLC: Boards will stay open for a place people can find history information longer. I am not allowing anyone to sign up for now because of so many foreginers just wanting to promote their business..
    December 10, 2016, 05:10:27 AM
  • Lepard LLC: Not sure why didn't look, I may be shutting down these message boards..
    November 17, 2016, 12:42:43 AM
  • ~kathy~: rick why is the timestamp showing up a day in advance?
    September 13, 2016, 12:27:46 AM
  • Valor7: What I tried to say is that the actual money would not be there that quick. But a loan against that would work if they are willing to do that.
    August 08, 2016, 01:51:51 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Why so long before it comes online? 911 took out a loan or bond with the known guarantee payment and began building..
    August 08, 2016, 07:46:34 AM
  • Valor7: Actually no it is not, a dependable Revenue stream will not come on line until the 4th quarter of 2017 so 2018 budget will be up in the air, not quite sure what they will have. By 2019 budget all will be well.
    August 04, 2016, 09:27:17 PM
  • Valor7: You mean that tax that the Commissioners would not put on the ballot for so many years? Strange things happened when the citizens got a chance to vote on that issue.
    August 03, 2016, 06:43:06 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Back up is now available withe the new tax..
    August 03, 2016, 05:01:35 PM
  • Valor7: Thanks a lot Ladies!!
    July 29, 2016, 01:16:13 PM
  • littlebit: ((*(*&
    July 27, 2016, 03:47:52 PM
  • ~kathy~: lol
    July 15, 2016, 09:34:56 AM
  • Valor7: A guy could get killed around here while waiting for backup!
    July 13, 2016, 07:31:58 PM
  • Lepard LLC: You are not alone..
    July 13, 2016, 07:28:53 PM
  • Valor7: I just hate it when I talk to myself!!!!
    July 08, 2016, 12:54:09 PM
  • Valor7: I could have worded that better, we talked details, options, the pros and cons of each, in  order to arrive at the best ballot language to present to the voters. Hope that makes this clearer.
    April 15, 2016, 06:36:14 PM
  • Valor7: sorry about the typos still working with just one arm in action
    April 13, 2016, 01:10:42 PM
  • Valor7: Yes and no. We talked details and options until we were blue in the face but I never heardbring it over, it was always the time was not right for the issue to pass. Glad to see the time in now right and I for one shall vote yes on the ballot. I would urge all others to do the sameour county is busting at the seams crimewise and no matter how many bad guys we send off there always seems to someone to replace them. The Sheriff's Office needs the help.
    April 13, 2016, 01:08:35 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Is that true Valor? Did he ask you what you wanted?
    March 01, 2016, 04:55:37 AM
  • Lepard LLC: Gene Newkirk Rick I have waited for a Sheriff to bring it to me on what he wanted. I have pushed Mr long for a while to get it to me. He told me he was close to having or done. Now hopefully the people will get to decide on it. I spoke with Steve about this a few times.
    March 01, 2016, 04:54:54 AM
  • Kimberly: Wow- I have a new name..........
    February 23, 2016, 10:25:15 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Works on mine, improvements are being done here. I may kick back into her a lot and post but working on different technologies right now. Seeing how things interact.
    January 18, 2016, 09:01:20 AM
  • Valor7: Yes it is working. If you need a laugh the wife showed me how to correctly use the silly thing.
    January 04, 2016, 05:32:59 PM
  • Valor7: Think so, mine is trying to work but it is now user and password protected and I dont know mine
    December 17, 2015, 01:32:16 PM
  • "DJ": Is there still a working android app for the PCSD
    December 14, 2015, 08:14:53 PM

Author Topic: .Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms  (Read 5065 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline fish

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 8885
  • Karma: +349278/-349867
    • View Profile
.Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms
« on: April 06, 2010, 02:12:54 AM »

Share/Bookmark


Offline shadylane

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 2196
  • Karma: +1060777/-13445
    • View Profile
Re: .Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms
« Reply #1 on: April 06, 2010, 02:29:10 AM »
My biggest worry is the tactical/theater nukes that the former USSR has. In the hands of terrorist they would be devastating. Any thing that helps to dispose of them is welcome in my opinion....
"The problem with America is stupidity. I'm not saying there should be a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?"

Offline fish

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 8885
  • Karma: +349278/-349867
    • View Profile
Re: .Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms
« Reply #2 on: April 06, 2010, 02:43:22 AM »
they will not be disposed of the way you want.

Offline prE4chEr

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 2811
  • Karma: +257500/-11759
  • Gender: Male
  • Go to Heaven for the climate, Hell for the company
    • View Profile
Re: .Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms
« Reply #3 on: April 06, 2010, 05:32:34 AM »
nobama hates America and wants to weaken our defenses and deterrents!

How has he weakened our defenses? Did you even read the article? All it says is that he is changing the conditions for using nuclear weapons to exclude biological, chemical, or cyberattacks. There are also going to be provisions in place that make it possible for the president to reconsider if the devolpment of these weapons reaches a level that makes an attack devasting to the United States. I don't see how this weakens us at all.
(\__/)
(o.O )
(> < )  Look into my evil eye. Bunny needs brains.....BRAINS!!!


"All that we see or seem
Is but a dream within a dream" Edgar Allan Poe

Offline tpgunbiz

  • B.M.F.
  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 2455
  • Karma: +687862/-35
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: .Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms
« Reply #4 on: April 06, 2010, 07:13:01 AM »
I am about peace. Frankly i wish Nuclear abilities had never been invented. But , they have. Obama has to be a retard not to keep them as a threat to communities seeking to posess the ultimate weapon. Taking them away as a threat will provoke a threat from some dumbass wanting to make a name for himself as a president. Its like owning a home and expecting Brinks to save you from the bad guy. Sometimes the bad guy gets through. Sometimes the bad guy has a weapon. and if you arent armed well enough to thwart such an attack, people who rob homes will certainly take the advise of those who got through and attack as well. But you bring out the shot gun and make it well known that if you cross my yard you will be shot to death.....your neighbors know you dont play, robbers know you you dont play,and the cops know that in the event you are attacked again......you will kill the attacker. its just preventitive.
Telling countries you wont use your weapon unless you use one on us, is the dumbest thing they can do. We have all weapons of mass destruction. And they should be held as a threat to prevent a strike against our people. We should also regroup and use our military to guard our own borders and  forget policing the world. they have the same opertunity as us to defend their borders
Biscuit

Offline prE4chEr

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 2811
  • Karma: +257500/-11759
  • Gender: Male
  • Go to Heaven for the climate, Hell for the company
    • View Profile
Re: .Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms
« Reply #5 on: April 06, 2010, 08:02:04 AM »
Obama has to be a retard not to keep them as a threat to communities seeking to posess the ultimate weapon.

He has only taken them off the table for nonnuclear countries that comply with the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
 
It's just like having a gun, but not using it in a fight because you know the other person doesn't have one.
(\__/)
(o.O )
(> < )  Look into my evil eye. Bunny needs brains.....BRAINS!!!


"All that we see or seem
Is but a dream within a dream" Edgar Allan Poe

Offline matrsnot

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 7612
  • Karma: +489606/-6227
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: .Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms
« Reply #6 on: April 06, 2010, 12:03:37 PM »
This is nothing more than political hyperbole.  LImits are already set as to when and how nukes are to be use.  Of course, that does not mean we should wait to defend ourselves until after half the country is wiped out either.  I suppose as long as Obama keeps the cities intact, he thinks it is ok.  Afterall, they are his sheep.

Offline I.M.CURIOUS

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 144
  • Karma: +3159/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • GASCONADE RIVER YACHT CLUB REGATTA
    • View Profile
Re: .Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms
« Reply #7 on: April 06, 2010, 02:50:13 PM »
Does this mean if America or those countries considered "Under Our Nuclear Umbrella" is attacked with Biological or Chemical weapons,we won't retaliate?Other Presidents, of both political parties,have always said Nuclear,biological or chemical attacks would be countered by immediate American nuclear strikes.
The power of accurate perception is commonly referred to as cynicism by those who have not got it.George Bernard Shaw

Offline shadylane

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 2196
  • Karma: +1060777/-13445
    • View Profile
Re: .Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms
« Reply #8 on: April 07, 2010, 12:48:50 AM »
Does this mean if America or those countries considered "Under Our Nuclear Umbrella" is attacked with Biological or Chemical weapons,we won't retaliate?Other Presidents, of both political parties,have always said Nuclear,biological or chemical attacks would be countered by immediate American nuclear strikes.

There has been biological attacks in America over the last several year....does this mean we should use nukes on the states involved?  Often the country from which attacks come need our help not a nuke.....
"The problem with America is stupidity. I'm not saying there should be a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?"

Offline matrsnot

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 7612
  • Karma: +489606/-6227
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: .Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms
« Reply #9 on: April 07, 2010, 01:22:14 AM »
Advocate that love the enemy stuff all you want.  it is apparent how that strategy has worked under this administration.  The fanatics are still coming at us even though he loves them.

Offline Geezer Glide Taz

  • Land Of The Free, Because Of The Brave
  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 3077
  • Karma: +1004673/-68
  • Gender: Male
  • Riding Vertical Shiny Side Up
    • View Profile
Re: .Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms
« Reply #10 on: April 07, 2010, 02:25:42 PM »
Guys, this is not weakening us at all, actually it is a toll to try and prevent other countries from building them. What is says is, we will not use nukes against a non-nuke country. It does not say we are going to allow people to attack us. If a country attacks us with Chemical and or Bio, we are not going to use Chem or bio weapons either, because we signed a treaty a long time ago against Bio weapons. But we will retaliate.
What this treaty does, is prevent a small country, say Iran, from wanting to build a nuke, because if they do, they know that any attack on us could result in being nuked, but say Libia attacks us in some form, we will retaliate, but will not nuke them because they have abided by the UN Nuke saction and never built one.
So we have not been weakened, we have not told the world it is OK to attakc us, we have only stated that if a country complies with the nuclear sactions, then the US will never use them against you. Did not say we would not retaliate. We have missles that can still mess up your day without using a nuke. Ask Sadam...oh wait can't ask him.
Anyways, this is a tool to make countries think before building a nuke, knowing if they own one, all bets are off.
Freedom Of Road Riders,
Protecting and informing riders in Missouri
www.midamericafreedomrally.com

Please watch out for Motorcycles on the road
The life you save might be mine

Offline matrsnot

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 7612
  • Karma: +489606/-6227
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: .Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms
« Reply #11 on: April 07, 2010, 02:39:23 PM »
Taz, my last answer was to Shadylane regarding his statement.  I stated earlier there have always been rules restricting the use of nukes.  I remember when I was involved with their use in the early '70s.  We had rules then and still do now.  There is no weakening of our ability to defend ourselves.  I just don't want them to have to nuke us first and obliterate large portions of the population before Obama decides to push the button.

Offline fish

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 8885
  • Karma: +349278/-349867
    • View Profile
Re: .Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms
« Reply #12 on: April 07, 2010, 07:59:39 PM »
laying out our cards for all to see is a mistake. what we don't say is what makes the deterrent stronger.

Offline shadylane

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 2196
  • Karma: +1060777/-13445
    • View Profile
Re: .Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms
« Reply #13 on: April 08, 2010, 12:44:05 AM »
Taz, my last answer was to Shadylane regarding his statement.  I stated earlier there have always been rules restricting the use of nukes.  I remember when I was involved with their use in the early '70s.  We had rules then and still do now.  There is no weakening of our ability to defend ourselves.  I just don't want them to have to nuke us first and obliterate large portions of the population before Obama decides to push the button.

Taz answered this question perfectly in my opinion. Much better than I would have.
"The problem with America is stupidity. I'm not saying there should be a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?"

Offline Geezer Glide Taz

  • Land Of The Free, Because Of The Brave
  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 3077
  • Karma: +1004673/-68
  • Gender: Male
  • Riding Vertical Shiny Side Up
    • View Profile
Re: .Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms
« Reply #14 on: April 12, 2010, 03:16:07 PM »
Of course when I worked with nuke back in the 70s and 80s, our moto was "Nuke em Til they Glow"
Freedom Of Road Riders,
Protecting and informing riders in Missouri
www.midamericafreedomrally.com

Please watch out for Motorcycles on the road
The life you save might be mine

Offline fish

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 8885
  • Karma: +349278/-349867
    • View Profile
Re: .Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms
« Reply #15 on: April 13, 2010, 03:08:43 AM »
and still a good plan, when attacked.

Offline Pete

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 1505
  • Karma: +90258/-1279
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: .Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms
« Reply #16 on: April 14, 2010, 05:56:24 AM »
You are all missing the point. See how he got everyone to stop talking about obama health care. Watch both hands of this slick dude. The folks we are so worried about having a nuke don't have a country.
If your going to be dumb, you better be tough!

Offline matrsnot

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 7612
  • Karma: +489606/-6227
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: .Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms
« Reply #17 on: April 14, 2010, 11:57:11 AM »
Of course when I worked with nuke back in the 70s and 80s, our moto was "Nuke em Til they Glow"
You left out the rest.  "then use their asses for runway lights."

Offline fish

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 8885
  • Karma: +349278/-349867
    • View Profile
Re: .Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms
« Reply #18 on: April 14, 2010, 10:16:19 PM »
china is talking about healthcare,how much it will cost them to finance the bonds.

no one has forgotten. 18 states have filed suit anfd the teaparties go on. the discussion now includes the nuke issue.

is nobama the 1st anti american president?

Offline Racer

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 607
  • Karma: +169381/-3619
    • View Profile
Re: .Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms
« Reply #19 on: April 14, 2010, 11:00:42 PM »
china is talking about healthcare,how much it will cost them to finance the bonds.

no one has forgotten. 18 states have filed suit anfd the teaparties go on. the discussion now includes the nuke issue.

is nobama the 1st anti american president?

No he is not anti American.  No, oh wait did I say No.  Hey Fish the answer is No.

Offline fish

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 8885
  • Karma: +349278/-349867
    • View Profile
Re: .Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms
« Reply #20 on: April 15, 2010, 12:35:47 PM »
interesting you needed to answer. he refuses to provide proof he is a citizen,and since nobama has been in office what has he done for America? he has done plenty to it.

Offline Racer

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 607
  • Karma: +169381/-3619
    • View Profile
Re: .Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms
« Reply #21 on: April 15, 2010, 01:31:29 PM »
interesting you needed to answer. he refuses to provide proof he is a citizen,and since nobama has been in office what has he done for America? he has done plenty to it.

 
Interesting you need to continue to mention where he was born, give us a break.  Every leader this country has ever had has done something to it. 

Offline Chas

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 1856
  • Karma: +11629/-2363
    • View Profile
Re: .Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms
« Reply #22 on: April 15, 2010, 01:33:33 PM »
He has provided proof but birthers refuse to believe it. What has he done to the country?  There is health care may not be the best plan and I believe that there will be changes to it in the future.  He is signing or has signed a nuclear agreement. Which by the way is similar to the one Reagan wanted or had. He inherited a lot of the national debt.  People jump jumped on a bandwagon about guns but he signed the bill allowing them to be carried in National Parks.  He is talking about allowing off shore drilling. This president is worse or better than any we have had in the past.  So unless your question is Obama the 1st anti American president was rhetorical, why are you surprised that people reply to your question?

Offline shadylane

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 2196
  • Karma: +1060777/-13445
    • View Profile
Re: .Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms
« Reply #23 on: April 16, 2010, 01:13:00 AM »
Back to the original post.
After all the political BS. The most important and least ranted about part of this subject is....The control and safety of weapons grade nuclear material. I wish Ronald Reagan was still alive to help accomplish this one.... Then maybe the right wing would STFU and see something we desperately need is within reach.....
"The problem with America is stupidity. I'm not saying there should be a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?"

Offline fish

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 8885
  • Karma: +349278/-349867
    • View Profile
Re: .Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms
« Reply #24 on: April 16, 2010, 02:01:15 AM »
read the health care bill and see what it contains. what about all the spending? he created far more debt than he "inherited". remember, nobama voted for every spending bill W proposed. the gun deal was an ammendment to the credit card bill. it was not a stand alone bill.

it is impossible to control weapons grade nuclear material when countries are helping other countries with their nuclear programs. such as russia helping iran. who gave nk their stuff? I believe bubba helped out with a reactor awhile back. I don't believe there is any way to control the material. we can't stop the drug trade, we can't and no other country can, stem the flow of nuclear material. that's just the way it is. too many players in the game.

Offline shadylane

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 2196
  • Karma: +1060777/-13445
    • View Profile
Re: .Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms
« Reply #25 on: April 17, 2010, 01:25:12 AM »
"An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure"

I'm all for trying to stop terrorist from acquiring nukes.
The majority of nations agree. Since someone has to start the ball rolling, let it be the United States.
 
As Mr Fish pointed out
"it is impossible to control weapons grade nuclear material when countries are helping other countries with their nuclear programs"
Then we must control the spread of nukes at the international level. With treaties and diplomacy.....
"The problem with America is stupidity. I'm not saying there should be a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?"

Offline fish

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 8885
  • Karma: +349278/-349867
    • View Profile
Re: .Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms
« Reply #26 on: April 17, 2010, 01:33:40 AM »
how is russia, china or any other country going to be stopped from supplying materials? I am all for preventing terrorists from acquiring nukes, but the door has already been opened. pakistan is not the most stable country and they have nuclear weapons. india also. the right price will get the terrorists what they want. it is only a matter of time. I don't think there is anyway to stop it. we can't stop the drug trade, how can we or any other country stop the nuclear materials trade. the threat of retaliation is the answer. that is why china hasn't attacked us,yet. they would not survive the retaliation.

Offline okie the thread killer

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 4857
  • Karma: +2619917/-766
    • View Profile
Re: .Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms
« Reply #27 on: April 17, 2010, 01:41:09 AM »
considering what, historically, we have supplied Iraq and Iran, and numerous other countries, then you are right Fish...there is nothing to stop it...but don't forget, we have supplied many many of what are now our enemies.
I have it on good authority that the Hokey-Pokey really IS what it's all about.

Offline okie the thread killer

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 4857
  • Karma: +2619917/-766
    • View Profile
Re: .Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms
« Reply #28 on: April 17, 2010, 01:41:51 AM »
and we put those "MONSTERS" in power.
I have it on good authority that the Hokey-Pokey really IS what it's all about.

Offline fish

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 8885
  • Karma: +349278/-349867
    • View Profile
Re: .Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms
« Reply #29 on: April 17, 2010, 01:46:32 AM »
yep, you are right okie.