Board index › General Discussion › News and Current Events

Nuclear Arms Race: On

Page 1 of 2 [ 18 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

androbot01
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Sep 2014
Age: 55
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,746
Location: Kingston, Ontario, Canada

23 Feb 2017, 6:41 pm

CBS: Trump says he wants to expand U.S. nuclear arsenal

Quote:
He said in the interview Thursday that he wants U.S. nuclear capability to be at the “top of the pack,” but that the country has “fallen behind on nuclear weapon capacity.”

“I am the first one that would like to see everybody - nobody have nukes, but we’re never going to fall behind any country even if it’s a friendly country, we’re never going to fall behind on nuclear power,” he said. “It would be wonderful, a dream would be that no country would have nukes, but if countries are going to have nukes, we’re going to be at the top of the pack.”



EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

23 Feb 2017, 8:52 pm

Bad idea. Too 20th century. We need to develop a single doomsday bomb that will instantly destroy all life on the entire surface of the planet. Except for the elite who will be safety tucked away.



QuantumChemist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Oct 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,111
Location: Midwest

23 Feb 2017, 9:24 pm

EzraS wrote:
Bad idea. Too 20th century. We need to develop a single doomsday bomb that will instantly destroy all life on the entire surface of the planet. Except for the elite who will be safety tucked away.


There are things in the universe that are much more powerful than anything that the hands of man can create at this point in time. In a sense, those things become models for what others strive to "own" someday, be it a process to create a miniature black hole, small scaled controlled thermal fusion or even selectively form matter/anti-matter from pure energy. Unfortunately, there are always those who seek to find ways to reproduce greater power sources for warfare rather than for the greater good of humanity. Sad to say, but part of human nature is the ability to want to destroy each other. I really wish that was not the case.



Skilpadde
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Dec 2008
Age: 49
Gender: Female
Posts: 27,019

23 Feb 2017, 9:32 pm

EzraS wrote:
Bad idea. Too 20th century. We need to develop a single doomsday bomb that will instantly destroy all life on the entire surface of the planet. Except for the elite who will be safety tucked away.
Well, Russia is making progress there, building nukes doing increasingly more damage. Their newest bomb Satan 2 is powerful enough to wipe out UK, France or Texas
It's not quite what you asked for, but they're doing their best. :lol:


_________________
BOLTZ 17/3 2012 - 12/11 2020
Beautiful, sweet, gentle, playful, loyal
simply the best and one of a kind
love you and miss you, dear boy

Stop the wolf kills! https://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeact ... 3091429765


Sigbold
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Jan 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,933
Location: Netherlands

23 Feb 2017, 9:48 pm

I watched the video for about 3 minutes before deciding to skip ahead an see we actually going to see/hear the interview the journalist had with president Trump, but no. So we do not know in what context those answers where given, or even if they are the complete answer. Also seems to be a far cry from wanting nuclear primacy.

Also there was a later (2013) article that stated that it appeared that nuclear primacy was a goal of US policy, this would of course include the Obama administration.

Quote:
Based on what we have subsequently learned, we would recast and sharpen this part of our argument to contend that the United States is intentionally pursuing “strategic primacy”—meaning that Washington seeks the ability to defeat enemy nuclear forces (as well as other WMD)—but that US nuclear weapons are but one dimension of that effort. In fact, the effort to neutralize adversary strategic forces—that is, achieve strategic primacy—spans nearly every realm of warfare: for example, ballistic missile defense, antisubmarine warfare, intelligencesurveillance-and-reconnaissance systems, offensive cyber warfare, conventional precision strike, and long-range precision strike, in addition to nuclear strike capabilities.



androbot01
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Sep 2014
Age: 55
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,746
Location: Kingston, Ontario, Canada

24 Feb 2017, 3:22 am

Sigbold wrote:
... see we actually going to see/hear the interview the journalist had with president Trump, but no.


The interview is with Reuters and the quote is as I referenced it above, but here you go again.

Reuters: Trump wants to make sure U.S. nuclear arsenal at 'top of the pack'
Quote:
In his first comments about the U.S. nuclear arsenal since taking office on Jan. 20, Trump was asked about a December tweet in which he said the United States must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capacity "until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes."

Trump said in the interview he would like to see a world with no nuclear weapons but expressed concern that the United States has "fallen behind on nuclear weapon capacity."

“I am the first one that would like to see ... nobody have nukes, but we’re never going to fall behind any country even if it’s a friendly country, we’re never going to fall behind on nuclear power.

"It would be wonderful, a dream would be that no country would have nukes, but if countries are going to have nukes, we’re going to be at the top of the pack," Trump said


It's not rocket science. (Oh wait, it is.)



Sigbold
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Jan 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,933
Location: Netherlands

26 Feb 2017, 6:25 am

androbot01 wrote:
Sigbold wrote:
... see we actually going to see/hear the interview the journalist had with president Trump, but no.


The interview is with Reuters and the quote is as I referenced it above, but here you go again.

Reuters: Trump wants to make sure U.S. nuclear arsenal at 'top of the pack'


I wanted the complete interview, not an other summary with some quotations. ;)

Quote:
Quote:
In his first comments about the U.S. nuclear arsenal since taking office on Jan. 20, Trump was asked about a December tweet in which he said the United States must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capacity "until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes."

Trump said in the interview he would like to see a world with no nuclear weapons but expressed concern that the United States has "fallen behind on nuclear weapon capacity."

“I am the first one that would like to see ... nobody have nukes, but we’re never going to fall behind any country even if it’s a friendly country, we’re never going to fall behind on nuclear power.

"It would be wonderful, a dream would be that no country would have nukes, but if countries are going to have nukes, we’re going to be at the top of the pack," Trump said


It's not rocket science. (Oh wait, it is.)


No, it is geopolitics. And you do realise the US is in the midst of renovating its arsenal. And only signed certain treaties to reduce the number of nukes they have because they could build more destructive ones. And once again I see nothing in relation to nuclear primacy. At most in the part that talks about placing anti-missile defences in Japan to counter a potential attack from N-Korea. Which is, to be bluntly, more believable then the excuse that the anti-ballistic installations in Eastern-Europe where put there to defend against an attack from Iran.

Now it might be possible that Trump is doing a ploy similar to that of Reagan in order to force other countries to be more serious about nuclear disarmament. Unfortunately, either the journalist did not ask what Trump would want to see in place of treaties like START, or he did not summarize/quote that part of the American presidents answer.

I short what I see here, means at worst that there will be no fundamental change in US policy in regards to nuclear primacy (something the USA strived for at least since W. Bush, of not since Clinton), which has little to nothing to do with overkill in capacity for retaliation. And at best a ploy to force other countries to make serious work of nuclear disarmament, or prevent further spread of nuclear weapons production capabilities.



androbot01
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Sep 2014
Age: 55
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,746
Location: Kingston, Ontario, Canada

26 Feb 2017, 9:19 am

Sigbold wrote:
androbot01 wrote:
Sigbold wrote:
... see we actually going to see/hear the interview the journalist had with president Trump, but no.


The interview is with Reuters and the quote is as I referenced it above, but here you go again.

Reuters: Trump wants to make sure U.S. nuclear arsenal at 'top of the pack'


I wanted the complete interview, not an other summary with some quotations. ;)

Quote:
Quote:
In his first comments about the U.S. nuclear arsenal since taking office on Jan. 20, Trump was asked about a December tweet in which he said the United States must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capacity "until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes."

Trump said in the interview he would like to see a world with no nuclear weapons but expressed concern that the United States has "fallen behind on nuclear weapon capacity."

“I am the first one that would like to see ... nobody have nukes, but we’re never going to fall behind any country even if it’s a friendly country, we’re never going to fall behind on nuclear power.

"It would be wonderful, a dream would be that no country would have nukes, but if countries are going to have nukes, we’re going to be at the top of the pack," Trump said


It's not rocket science. (Oh wait, it is.)


No, it is geopolitics. And you do realise the US is in the midst of renovating its arsenal. And only signed certain treaties to reduce the number of nukes they have because they could build more destructive ones. And once again I see nothing in relation to nuclear primacy. At most in the part that talks about placing anti-missile defences in Japan to counter a potential attack from N-Korea. Which is, to be bluntly, more believable then the excuse that the anti-ballistic installations in Eastern-Europe where put there to defend against an attack from Iran.

Now it might be possible that Trump is doing a ploy similar to that of Reagan in order to force other countries to be more serious about nuclear disarmament. Unfortunately, either the journalist did not ask what Trump would want to see in place of treaties like START, or he did not summarize/quote that part of the American presidents answer.

I short what I see here, means at worst that there will be no fundamental change in US policy in regards to nuclear primacy (something the USA strived for at least since W. Bush, of not since Clinton), which has little to nothing to do with overkill in capacity for retaliation. And at best a ploy to force other countries to make serious work of nuclear disarmament, or prevent further spread of nuclear weapons production capabilities.


Geez, you went to some trouble to get the same information I already provided. Kudos.

I'm curious as to how you are able to take the suggestion of nuclear primacy out of the phrase: “I am the first one that would like to see ... nobody have nukes, but we’re never going to fall behind any country even if it’s a friendly country, we’re never going to fall behind on nuclear power." Is this some Trumpian logic you are using?



jrjones9933
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage

26 Feb 2017, 9:26 am

Picture a set of piles. One is larger than all the others. They can all grow or shrink and maintain that relative position.

We all want the biggest pile, being people. Some of us want to shrink all the piles, others want to grow them all.


_________________
"I find that the best way [to increase self-confidence] is to lie to yourself about who you are, what you've done, and where you're going." - Richard Ayoade


androbot01
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Sep 2014
Age: 55
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,746
Location: Kingston, Ontario, Canada

26 Feb 2017, 9:42 am

That went over my head like a Stealth.



jrjones9933
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage

26 Feb 2017, 9:59 am

Forget it, then. Piles of nukes?


_________________
"I find that the best way [to increase self-confidence] is to lie to yourself about who you are, what you've done, and where you're going." - Richard Ayoade


androbot01
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Sep 2014
Age: 55
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,746
Location: Kingston, Ontario, Canada

26 Feb 2017, 10:04 am

jrjones9933 wrote:
Forget it, then. Piles of nukes?

Ah, gottcha. I'm a little fuzzy of a Sunday morning.
It doesn't matter, I suppose, how many nukes are in the world, it would only take one to do catastrophic damage. My fear is that Trump is just the sort of person who would let his emotions guide his decision making.



jrjones9933
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage

26 Feb 2017, 10:07 am

Except it does matter. The things are toxic as hell and a real b***h to dispose of when you have to take them apart. That can cause a disaster, too, and it adds up. Every one you build, you eventually have to take apart and store for a millennium or so.


_________________
"I find that the best way [to increase self-confidence] is to lie to yourself about who you are, what you've done, and where you're going." - Richard Ayoade


androbot01
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Sep 2014
Age: 55
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,746
Location: Kingston, Ontario, Canada

26 Feb 2017, 10:26 am

And then there's the chance of accident like Chernobyl and Fukushima.



jrjones9933
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage

26 Feb 2017, 12:36 pm

That's why they put it in the Texas panhandle. People out there are a bit different. Just ask them.


_________________
"I find that the best way [to increase self-confidence] is to lie to yourself about who you are, what you've done, and where you're going." - Richard Ayoade


Lintar
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Nov 2012
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,777
Location: Victoria, Australia

28 Feb 2017, 11:08 pm

Sigbold wrote:
Now it might be possible that Trump is doing a ploy similar to that of Reagan in order to force other countries to be more serious about nuclear disarmament.


Where did you get this idea from? Reagan wanted overwhelming superiority so that he could launch a successful first strike against the U.S.S.R. Those of us who followed these issues during the 1980's (like me) all know this, it's common knowledge. It seems that Trump now wants to attempt the same thing.