Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Just follow the on screen instructions and you'll have an account in no time!

Join our community! (click here)

We hope you enjoy your visit.

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
David Cameron
Topic Started: May 11 2010, 10:30 PM (1,036 Views)
m8x115
Newbie DIY'er
Eirik
May 30 2010, 02:02 PM
Mr Master52
May 30 2010, 12:24 PM
Obama can destroy Norway in a matter of hours, as he can destroy any other country. now THAT'S power
I hope you are kidding. Because he can't.
Sorry to say Eirik, he can. The President of the USA has the power to take complete command of the US army, including nuclear weapons, in a time of war. The President has the power to declare war. Therefore, he has complete control of all the nuclear weapons controlled by the USA. Which is a LOT.
Definitely enough to destroy a country the size of Norway. Or Britain. Or China.

Also, I'm not American.

And I support Cameron.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Eirik
Member Avatar
I'm Dishonest To Be Honest
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
m8x115
Jun 1 2010, 12:21 AM
Eirik
May 30 2010, 02:02 PM
Mr Master52
May 30 2010, 12:24 PM
Obama can destroy Norway in a matter of hours, as he can destroy any other country. now THAT'S power
I hope you are kidding. Because he can't.
Sorry to say Eirik, he can. The President of the USA has the power to take complete command of the US army, including nuclear weapons, in a time of war. The President has the power to declare war. Therefore, he has complete control of all the nuclear weapons controlled by the USA. Which is a LOT.
Definitely enough to destroy a country the size of Norway. Or Britain. Or China.

Also, I'm not American.

And I support Cameron.
It saddens me to see how little you know about the political system that the United States of America uses. Obama, as the President, has the final word in many cases, but far from all. What seperates Obama from people like Saddam Hussein and Hitler, is not that Obama is "nice". The Republican Democracy of The United States of America has a "fail-safe system", meaning that if the President were to give an order that violates with the Constitution, the order would be dismissed and in worst case scenario, the President himself removed from his post.

Another fact that stops USA, or any country for that matter, to attack a Europea country, is that we are members of NATO. That means that if any of us were to be attacked, every other country in NATO would help the country in need to either resolve the conflict, defend themselves or counter-attack.

In Norway, we learn about the politics in all major countries and unions in the world. I hope you do the same and just forgot what you learned...
Edited by Eirik, Jun 1 2010, 08:18 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Saj_61
Member Avatar
Intermediate DIY'er
[ *  *  * ]
Eirik is right america have a fail-safe so obama couldn't do that. However America could attack Norway, and destroy it in a matter of hours, but as we all know that would be the start of the end of the world. America have enough nukes to destroy the world like 3 or 4 times (why they need that many is beyond me, surely you only need enough to destroy it once).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
m8x115
Newbie DIY'er
No system is foolproof. The "fail-safe system" you speak of is no exception. Obama DOES have the power to use all the nuclear weapons the Americans control. He can launch them HIMSELF.
The fact that Norway is part of NATO just means that if Obama was to use nuclear weapons against Norway, then the USA would be destroyed as well as a result of other countries using nuclear weapons against the United States.

Now, can we get back on topic, I believe this is a debate about David Cameron and not whether or not Obama can use nuclear weapons.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Eirik
Member Avatar
I'm Dishonest To Be Honest
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
We are done with Cameron, this debate is more interesting.

I'm afraid you are wrong m8. Obama could not destroy anything more than a cat, unless some other people were in on it too. The Secretary of Defence for one. Obama lack the ability to give such an order on his own, he would need others to approve.

If you think Obama has a button on his desk that says "Drop nukes", you are mistaken. It is a very ellaborate system, created so that no one man could give such an order.

Now let's say you admit that Obama alone can't drop nukes, but USA's goverment could. That's like saying that eating shit is possible. Sure, it is PHYSICALLY possible, but it is practically impossible. It won't be done and shouldn't be done. Theoretically speaking, yes it could be done.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Eddie
Member Avatar
Paranormal DIY'er
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Eirik
Jun 1 2010, 03:54 PM
If you think Obama has a button on his desk that says "Drop nukes", you are mistaken. It is a very ellaborate system, created so that no one man could give such an order.
Actually, Obama does have a button constantly with him that does just that (link). The secretary of defense does have to confirm the order, however, the president picks the secretary of defense. If the president doesn't like the secretary, Obama can get rid of him and replace him.

But you are right in that sense Eirik, Obama would not likely fire one unless there was a dire need. But still, he has that power. With a touch of a button and rouge selection, countries could (in theory) be destroyed. And it wouldn't just be the countries the US attacks. That is power.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
James
Member Avatar
Intermediate DIY'er
[ *  *  * ]
Eirik
Jun 1 2010, 03:54 PM
Obama could not destroy anything more than a cat
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Eirik
Member Avatar
I'm Dishonest To Be Honest
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Eddie
Jun 1 2010, 07:14 PM
Eirik
Jun 1 2010, 03:54 PM
If you think Obama has a button on his desk that says "Drop nukes", you are mistaken. It is a very ellaborate system, created so that no one man could give such an order.
Actually, Obama does have a button constantly with him that does just that (link). The secretary of defense does have to confirm the order, however, the president picks the secretary of defense. If the president doesn't like the secretary, Obama can get rid of him and replace him.

But you are right in that sense Eirik, Obama would not likely fire one unless there was a dire need. But still, he has that power. With a touch of a button and rouge selection, countries could (in theory) be destroyed. And it wouldn't just be the countries the US attacks. That is power.
He can't drop nukes with the Box, he can simply authorize it. It is simply a tool for secure communication between the president and the White House.

The US goverment would never fire another nuclear bomb. They saw the consequences after Hiroshima and Nagasaki and will never drop another one, even if someone dropped one on them.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
m8x115
Newbie DIY'er
Eirik
Jun 2 2010, 08:39 AM
The US goverment would never fire another nuclear bomb. They saw the consequences after Hiroshima and Nagasaki and will never drop another one, even if someone dropped one on them.
That is complete crap. The whole point of them having nukes to deter other people from nuking them, if they were attacked with atomics, they WOULD retaliate.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Eirik
Member Avatar
I'm Dishonest To Be Honest
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
m8x115
Jun 3 2010, 01:26 AM
Eirik
Jun 2 2010, 08:39 AM
The US goverment would never fire another nuclear bomb. They saw the consequences after Hiroshima and Nagasaki and will never drop another one, even if someone dropped one on them.
That is complete crap. The whole point of them having nukes to deter other people from nuking them, if they were attacked with atomics, they WOULD retaliate.
Sorry, but you are terribly wrong.

During the entire Cold War, the US goverment never intended to drop a nuclear bomb. The whole point about the nukes, was to demonstrate power. Both USA and The Soviet Union, tried to pocess the most nuclear weapons, but neither would ever drop one.

So no, the whole point about USA having atomic weapons is not to have something to throw back at somebody if they should drop nukes on USA - it is to demonstrate USA's power.

You should get your facts straight before going out so strong m8 ;).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Eddie
Member Avatar
Paranormal DIY'er
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Eirik
Jun 3 2010, 06:47 PM
m8x115
Jun 3 2010, 01:26 AM
Eirik
Jun 2 2010, 08:39 AM
The US goverment would never fire another nuclear bomb. They saw the consequences after Hiroshima and Nagasaki and will never drop another one, even if someone dropped one on them.
That is complete crap. The whole point of them having nukes to deter other people from nuking them, if they were attacked with atomics, they WOULD retaliate.
Sorry, but you are terribly wrong.

During the entire Cold War, the US goverment never intended to drop a nuclear bomb. The whole point about the nukes, was to demonstrate power. Both USA and The Soviet Union, tried to pocess the most nuclear weapons, but neither would ever drop one.

So no, the whole point about USA having atomic weapons is not to have something to throw back at somebody if they should drop nukes on USA - it is to demonstrate USA's power.

You should get your facts straight before going out so strong m8 ;).
US would only retaliate if it was absolutely necessary (i.e. nonnuclear weapon ideas could not be used). If we get bombarded with an attack, I'm certain we would use nuclear weapons. This isn't the Cold War or the 1980's anymore Eirik.

As much as I hate to sound like I belong on Fox News, the only country capable of an attack like that right now is China. One cannot simply send a bomb flying through the air to the U.S. Our lovely country has a missile defense system that has the capability to shoot down missiles midair. Guess who was the first country who designed a missile capable of taking down a satellite? China. Obviously there is very little motive for an attack on the US, but all the possibility is there.

If 8 warheads from a country of China's capability, we would respond with a swift, nuclear attack or would we wait 48 hours while the country is free to fire more nukes while we attempt to send in troops? We both know the answer...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mr Master52
Member Avatar
Elephant :O!
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Lol of course Obama wouldn't attack any other country, especially Norway, there's no point, but he COULD, that's all. And, seriously, the only group of people that would launch a nuke right now are the terrorists
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Eddie
Member Avatar
Paranormal DIY'er
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Mr Master52
Jun 4 2010, 06:07 PM
Lol of course Obama wouldn't attack any other country, especially Norway, there's no point, but he COULD, that's all. And, seriously, the only group of people that would launch a nuke right now are the terrorists
I would be so sure about that one...North Korea has weapons and tensions between the two countries are skyrocketing. The US supports South Korea. Did you hear about that ship North Korea sunk? I foresee a war soon...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mr Master52
Member Avatar
Elephant :O!
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Why do random countries like North Korea want to kill innocent people because of a power play?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Eddie
Member Avatar
Paranormal DIY'er
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Mr Master52
Jun 5 2010, 06:46 PM
Why do random countries like North Korea want to kill innocent people because of a power play?
North Korea is a second-world, communist nation (little redundant there). Half of their government leaders are dead but they convince their citizens that they are alive by realeasing articles they wrote years before their death. Power and fear is the only way they can stay in power. War is one of the best ways to gain patriotism and faith to a country, two critical aspects of communist governments. They want a war with South Korea simply to prove they are top dog, but the US, UK, and Israel would all likely intervene. Taking out the ship was just a way of saying that they can.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Eirik
Member Avatar
I'm Dishonest To Be Honest
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Yeah, the situation in North-Korea is a bit fucked :(.

Let me ask any American a question. Do you honestly believe that Obama would ever drop a nuclear bomb? That would be the start of a nuclear war that would utlimately destroy the human race. Obama knows this - but do you?

According to what us in Norway learn about your president, he would never drop a nuke and go down in history as the destroyer of the earth. However, I could be wrong. So what do you yanks say?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
m8x115
Newbie DIY'er
Eirik
Jun 6 2010, 05:18 PM
Yeah, the situation in North-Korea is a bit fucked :(.

Let me ask any American a question. Do you honestly believe that Obama would ever drop a nuclear bomb? That would be the start of a nuclear war that would utlimately destroy the human race. Obama knows this - but do you?

According to what us in Norway learn about your president, he would never drop a nuke and go down in history as the destroyer of the earth. However, I could be wrong. So what do you yanks say?
I'm not an American (thank goodness) but I just want to point out a tiny flaw in your logic.
Let's take a look at a timeline:

Obama drops a bomb--->someone else drops a bomb--->nuclear winter----> end of human race

At which point does Obama "go down in history" as the killer of the human race?

Who exactly is there left to remember him?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Eirik
Member Avatar
I'm Dishonest To Be Honest
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
@m8:
I don't believe all humans would die following a nuclear war. I believe that the survival of the fittest will make sure that some humans adapt to the new enviorments and live on.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Saj_61
Member Avatar
Intermediate DIY'er
[ *  *  * ]
ye have you never played fallout? =p
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
m8x115
Newbie DIY'er
Firstly, sorry I haven't been on in a while, I had exams.

Now, to disprove you.

"That would be the start of a nuclear war that would utlimately destroy the human race." - By saying that, you are saying that the end result is the end of all humans.

"I don't believe all humans would die following a nuclear war." - Now you just contradict yourself.

You cannot have it both ways, Obama can destroy the human race and there be no humans to record this because they're all dead OR some survive and he doesn't go down in history as the destroyer of the human race because some members of the human race survived.

Anything to add?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create your own social network with a free forum.
Learn More · Sign-up for Free
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Debates · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Theme Created by Chort27 of NGL