[quote=Wilko][quote="newt.":4fa2d]
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Tripper
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by "newt.":4fa2d
wilko you make it sound like the us went on a rampage. It was either couple hundred thousand, or millions (on both sides) and a dragged out war o mainland japan for the next 2-10 years
edit.... anyway if a country wants to develope nukes, thats cool, but don't complain when we overthrow your goverment and carpet bomb your country
|
....and you better not complain when that country returns fire with the nukes they were developing and blows the shit of the U.S....
Why should the U.S government dictate who has nukes and who doesn't? What gives them the right to overthrow a country that is developing nukes when they have nukes themselves??
The U.S is allowed nukes to protect themselves from the rest of the world, so why can't the rest of the world have nukes to protect themselves from the U.S?
Seems logical to me, especially seeing as they've started two wars in the last 5 years - And are the only country in history that has actually used a nuke as an act of war. |
what I'm saying is..... USA is better.
tripper i think you have a much to positive view of people.[/quote:4fa2d]
Well, from my Foreign (ie: Not American) point of view, if i were a betting man, I would put money on the US starting a Nuclear war than North Korea, or (supposedly) Iran, or any of these other bumfuck nations that preport to have weapons of mass destruction. They are there purely to ward off bigger, more imperialistic nations, like the US.
The "USA #1!" arguement won't work with us, Newt. You gotta come up with something better than that :P[/quote:4fa2d]
Agreed.