[Artesian]

I think that every country in the world should have 1 nuke. That way everything will be equal. Once you launch that is it. Anyone and everyone can then launch where ever they want, if they want, and when they want. That means a total of 195 nukes. I am sure that Vatican City, Monaco, Nauru, Tuvalu, Liechtenstein, and a host of other countries would be happy with this arrangment. I guess that countries could sell their Nukes if they wanted to to the highest bidder. Oh no, that would not be fair because capitolistic countries are richer. Ok, then Nukes could only be sold to the poorest countries. This would be Zimbabwe, Congo, Democratic Republic, Burundi, Liberia, Guinea-Bissau, Somalia, Central African Republic, Eritrea, Niger, and Sierra Leone. I am sure that all the liberals would think this would be fair.
A

[Rupert]

I think that every country in the world should have 1 nuke. That way everything will be equal. Once you launch that is it. Anyone and everyone can then launch where ever they want, if they want, and when they want. That means a total of 195 nukes. I am sure that Vatican City, Monaco, Nauru, Tuvalu, Liechtenstein, and a host of other countries would be happy with this arrangment. I guess that countries could sell their Nukes if they wanted to to the highest bidder. Oh no, that would not be fair because capitolistic countries are richer. Ok, then Nukes could only be sold to the poorest countries. This would be Zimbabwe, Congo, Democratic Republic, Burundi, Liberia, Guinea-Bissau, Somalia, Central African Republic, Eritrea, Niger, and Sierra Leone. I am sure that all the liberals would think this would be fair.
A

Well, I am sure that I do not speak for all Liberals, or even very many, but I am in favor of decreasing the number of nukes we now have....by using some of them where they will make some pretty green glass for the local populations of countries that constantly holler "death to America". Of course, you don't own any nuclear weapons to use, they are all owned by my Socialist Government, so I will have to charge you admission to view the fireworks, should they be used. Maybe your Fat Cats will buy you some pretty sparklers?
Regards!

[Artesian]

Well, I am sure that I do not speak for all Liberals, or even very many, but I am in favor of decreasing the number of nukes we now have....by using some of them where they will make some pretty green glass for the local populations of countries that constantly holler "death to America". Of course, you don't own any nuclear weapons to use, they are all owned by my Socialist Government, so I will have to charge you admission to view the fireworks, should they be used. Maybe your Fat Cats will buy you some pretty sparklers?
Regards!

So you admit that your, my government is socialist. I knew it all the time. I do like your idea of getting rid of some of our nukes though. There are a few countries that come to mind. I have no fat cats. I do not need anything from any slim or fat cats. I am not even very fond of cats period. Dogs are more to my liking. I would pay for the public venue to watch the fireworks though.
A

[reeftool]

The problem with Nukes is that the knowledge to build them is well known. They will never go away. Larger countrys (in size) with the resources to do so can easily build them and hide it.

[Ratmagiclady]

It kind of is an amusing idea, but yeah, even Artesian shows how it wouldn't be practical, even if the 'one to a customer for starters' idea could be enforced in any way.

One thing the Cold War 'balance of terror' probably *did* do was avert another massive *conventional* war. Of course, all the proxy wars and other things justified by it all are currently a major reason for why we're having a lot of the global problems we do today: the Cold War was a big part of why the U.S. (And Soviets, and Chinese) propped up dictators like Saddam Hussein and before him the Shah that resulted in Iran looking like it does today, Kim Jong Il's regime, Vietnam, of course, (and even, basically, created the Taliban, among other insurgencies, not to mention supporting certain Saudi families and others with every interest in fomenting some anti-American sentiment and fundamentalism to divert their own people from their own injustices,)

...all this to do things indirectly, amid all that brinksmanship and all.

I don't think the U.S. has really *healed* from the Cold War, actually.... All this apocalyptic Fundamentalism and need for 'enemies' to continue policies for interests that could really write their own *checks* during the Cold War has a lot to do with this, too.

Fundamentalists in America, after all, were *dead* certain that their Apocalypse would come in the form of nuclear war with the Soviets.. And everyone 'living under The Bomb' kind of grew up expecting the other shoe to drop *somehow.*

Heck, lots of people are *still* trying to fight 'Godless Commies:' it's just that when the 'real' ones went away, they *really* had to start inventing some. Even if it's just about not getting ripped off on health care.

And, that said, there is really a difference between the problems of anyone having *any* bombs, and those of a few countries having *way too many bombs.*

Having more weapons than you can retain and control turns from 'protection' to 'a hazard to yourself and others,' after all.

We can stage them down, of course. The things are bloody expensive and obviously, inherently dangerous to have around. No sense tempting Mr. SNAFU with more things to go wrong than are even 'needed.' Maybe just enough to keep massive conventional war more or less off the table even makes a certain amount of 'sense' at the moment.

Of course, with nationalism kind of breaking down around the world, and even our own politics getting pretty divorced from much more than personality and identity politics, ...there's always the question of who actually gets the launch keys.

Peace through strength. Worked with the USSR.

[Rupert]

It kind of is an amusing idea, but yeah, even Artesian shows how it wouldn't be practical, even if the 'one to a customer for starters' idea could be enforced in any way.

One thing the Cold War 'balance of terror' probably *did* do was avert another massive *conventional* war. Of course, all the proxy wars and other things justified by it all are currently a major reason for why we're having a lot of the global problems we do today: the Cold War was a big part of why the U.S. (And Soviets, and Chinese) propped up dictators like Saddam Hussein and before him the Shah that resulted in Iran looking like it does today, Kim Jong Il's regime, Vietnam, of course, (and even, basically, created the Taliban, among other insurgencies, not to mention supporting certain Saudi families and others with every interest in fomenting some anti-American sentiment and fundamentalism to divert their own people from their own injustices,)

...all this to do things indirectly, amid all that brinksmanship and all.

I don't think the U.S. has really *healed* from the Cold War, actually.... All this apocalyptic Fundamentalism and need for 'enemies' to continue policies for interests that could really write their own *checks* during the Cold War has a lot to do with this, too.

Fundamentalists in America, after all, were *dead* certain that their Apocalypse would come in the form of nuclear war with the Soviets.. And everyone 'living under The Bomb' kind of grew up expecting the other shoe to drop *somehow.*

Heck, lots of people are *still* trying to fight 'Godless Commies:' it's just that when the 'real' ones went away, they *really* had to start inventing some. Even if it's just about not getting ripped off on health care.

And, that said, there is really a difference between the problems of anyone having *any* bombs, and those of a few countries having *way too many bombs.*

Having more weapons than you can retain and control turns from 'protection' to 'a hazard to yourself and others,' after all.

We can stage them down, of course. The things are bloody expensive and obviously, inherently dangerous to have around. No sense tempting Mr. SNAFU with more things to go wrong than are even 'needed.' Maybe just enough to keep massive conventional war more or less off the table even makes a certain amount of 'sense' at the moment.

Of course, with nationalism kind of breaking down around the world, and even our own politics getting pretty divorced from much more than personality and identity politics, ...there's always the question of who actually gets the launch keys.

Otis has them...he told me just yesterday. We should all sleep better tonight....right?

[Ratmagiclady]

Otis has them...he told me just yesterday. We should all sleep better tonight....right?

Well, he is a cyoot. Does the XO concur?

[Rupert]

Well, he is a cyoot. Does the XO concur?

Actually, I cheated here....this is a photo of Festus himself, not Otis. Festus is a peace loving Squirrel, very unlike Otis, and while not caring much about humans, he is concerned about corn crops and peanut fields if Otis nukes the world...otherwise, it's fine with him.
Regards!

[Ratmagiclady]

Actually, I cheated here....this is a photo of Festus himself, not Otis. Festus is a peace loving Squirrel, very unlike Otis, and while not caring much about humans, he is concerned about corn crops and peanut fields if Otis nukes the world...otherwise, it's fine with him.
Regards!

Guess it just goes to show, ....do you really know who holds the launch keys?

[Rupert]

Guess it just goes to show, ....do you really know who holds the launch keys?

Yes, like I told you, it is Otis. He demanded that I take this shot for you this evening so he would have equal exposure with Festus.......You can tell by that look in his eye, he would have no problem pushing the Button!
Regards!

Otis says.....Boom!

[Ratmagiclady]

You must understand, Rupert, that 'Crazier Than Thou' only works for so much.