Hillary will use nukes to defend Saudi, UAE, Kuwait???

I would use nukes to defend our allies, if it came to that. It is very unlikely that it would be necessary. Fast and devastating offensive attacks from subs and Aircraft Carriers would likely be more than enough.
 
I would use nukes to defend our allies, if it came to that. It is very unlikely that it would be necessary. Fast and devastating offensive attacks from subs and Aircraft Carriers would likely be more than enough.

In the event of something like that happening, instead of all of that muscle flexing with Aircraft Carriers, Battle Groups, and threats of violence and war, why not send a delegation with representatives from CodePINK, Cindy Sheehan, the Berkeley City Council, Global Exchange, Gold Star Families for Peace, The World Can't Wait, Troops Home Fast, and Troops Out Now and let them negotiate a peaceful resolution.
 
Hell yeah....!

In the event of something like that happening, instead of all of that muscle flexing with Aircraft Carriers, Battle Groups, and threats of violence and war, why not send a delegation with representatives from CodePINK, Cindy Sheehan, the Berkeley City Council, Global Exchange, Gold Star Families for Peace, The World Can't Wait, Troops Home Fast, and Troops Out Now and let them negotiate a peaceful resolution.


I would even chip in for a First Class one way ticket for darla,us cit,Bac and a couple of others in here!:D
 
I would even chip in for a First Class one way ticket for darla,us cit,Bac and a couple of others in here!:D

First Class tickets... Don't you think that is a bit "elitist"? Coach should be adequate. You don't see them as "Limousine Liberals", do you?
 
I do .................

First Class tickets... Don't you think that is a bit "elitist"? Coach should be adequate. You don't see them as "Limousine Liberals", do you?


and I would consider it their last meal...I'm a fair facists.............:cof1:

I would prefer the cargo section...belly of the plane sorta speak...but they would cry it's not PC!
 
if nations think that they can use nukes on other nations without consequences, what is to prevent them from doing so

as it stands, the us of a is still the only nation to have used nukes and we should make it plain that if any other nation decides to do so that we would retaliate

besides, we need the dust in the atmosphere to slow global warming/climate change...of course what it would change it to is still a matter of speculation, but it might be interesting to find out...
 
Back to the subject:
Rabidly pro-military animals like Hillary have conserved very muich subconscious thought on the unreal benefit of International Offefense, the improper misuse of peace power, and below all the miniscule problem(s) of how and why I shouldn't unleash the use of American nukuler cap-a-billy while still letting it fade as a useless deterrent.

This is what I read.
 
Using weapons freely and without though is a lifestyle that has no consequences at all, and that's what I learned from conservatives. :clink:

w

remember the chant 'nuke the gay liberal pregnant whales'?

a little old neutron bomb detonated over a number of large cities would reduce the world's population and do very little to mess with its infrastructure

the revised version of the golden rule seems to be 'do unto others before they can do unto you'

would you change your lifestyle (curtail it that is) so others could have more children or reduce your carbon footprint
 
Back
Top