1 Kragar  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:02:18pm

SPLITTERS!

2 Obdicut  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:02:53pm

Just so I’m clear, does this raise or lower the possibility that I get to scream “Wolverines?”

//

3 Kragar  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:04:28pm

re: #2 Obdicut

Just so I’m clear, does this raise or lower the possibility that I get to scream “Wolverines?”

//

Yes.

4 brookly red  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:05:11pm

re: #2 Obdicut

Just so I’m clear, does this raise or lower the possibility that I get to scream “Wolverines?”

//

when thinking nukes, no, not so much either way…

5 Kragar  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:07:15pm

re: #4 brookly red

when thinking nukes, no, not so much either way…

Just be prepared to head to the nearest Vault in a calm and orderly manner and remember to trust the Computer.

6 BishopX  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:08:51pm

Any guesses about the fate of the comprehensive test ban treaty next year?

7 brookly red  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:10:26pm

re: #5 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Just be prepared to head to the nearest Vault in a calm and orderly manner and remember to trust the Computer.

I just can’t get excited about lowering the number strategic war heads to the point where we can only destroy the world 4 times instead of 6… I am more worried a bout those pesky tactical nukes. Just my 2 cents.

8 What, me worry?  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:18:23pm

re: #7 brookly red

I just can’t get excited about lowering the number strategic war heads to the point where we can only destroy the world 4 times instead of 6… I am more worried a bout those pesky tactical nukes. Just my 2 cents.

Quack! Quack!

For some inexplicable reason, last weekend, I watched “The Day After” on youtube, the nuclear apocalyptic made-for-tv movie done in 1983… Jason Robard, Jo Beth Williams, John Lithgow was in it, too. Remember that one?

“Thirteen Republicans joined a unanimous Democratic caucus to vote in favor, exceeding the two-thirds majority required by the Constitution.” Lucky 13 baby, lucky 13.

9 albusteve  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:18:27pm

re: #7 brookly red

I just can’t get excited about lowering the number strategic war heads to the point where we can only destroy the world 4 times instead of 6… I am more worried a bout those pesky tactical nukes. Just my 2 cents.

a 10-1 advantage to the reds….and I wonder who pays for their decommission and cleanup of the ballistics….would that be us?

10 jamesfirecat  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:18:31pm

You know I’m starting to think this congress is about as “lame” as Douglas Bader was…

It may be “technically correct” but hell if that slows them down any….

11 brookly red  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:21:15pm

re: #9 albusteve

a 10-1 advantage to the reds…and I wonder who pays for their decommission and cleanup of the ballistics…would that be us?

well in that sense better us than oh I don’t know, Iran or Pakistan…

12 brookly red  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:25:22pm

The other thing that concerns me about arms treaties is delivery systems… some times I think we are counting bullets when maybe we should be counting guns? Again just a thought.

13 albusteve  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:27:23pm

re: #12 brookly red

The other thing that concerns me about arms treaties is delivery systems… some times I think we are counting bullets when maybe we should be counting guns? Again just a thought.

might you be interested in a new home?
[Link: 2012terra.blogspot.com…]

14 Kragar  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:28:02pm

As weapons go, Nukes are either a detterent or a terror weapon. Their negatives far outweigh any benefits on the battlefield in all but the most extreme of circumstances, and even those conditions are dwindling as technology improves.

15 brookly red  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:29:06pm

re: #13 albusteve

might you be interested in a new home?
[Link: 2012terra.blogspot.com…]

no, If I can’t walk to neighborhood store, bar or pizza shop then what is the point?

16 brookly red  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:30:17pm

re: #14 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

As weapons go, Nukes are either a detterent or a terror weapon. Their negatives far outweigh any benefits on the battlefield in all but the most extreme of circumstances, and even those conditions are dwindling as technology improves.

big nukes deter, little nukes invite. size matters.

17 albusteve  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:30:40pm

re: #15 brookly red

no, If I can’t walk to neighborhood store, bar or pizza shop then what is the point?

it’s got a basement pool?

18 brookly red  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:31:30pm

re: #17 albusteve

it’s got a basement pool?

so does my gym but I don’t want to live there…

19 albusteve  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:31:36pm

re: #14 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

As weapons go, Nukes are either a detterent or a terror weapon. Their negatives far outweigh any benefits on the battlefield in all but the most extreme of circumstances, and even those conditions are dwindling as technology improves.

don’t forget retribution, an eye for an eye as they say

20 albusteve  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:31:59pm

re: #18 brookly red

so does my gym but I don’t want to live there…

no down payment?

21 brookly red  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:32:17pm

re: #20 albusteve

no down payment?

get a real job…

22 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:32:18pm

re: #7 brookly red

I’m not sure we have enough to destroy the world. Certainly enough to kill everybody, but I still think a big ole gray ball’d be orbiting the sun for a while.

23 Kragar  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:34:57pm

re: #19 albusteve

don’t forget retribution, an eye for an eye as they say

As resources become limited, expect more of a “poison the well” approach.
“You might be able to outnumber us in the field, but we’ll burn our lands to radioactive cinder rather than let you have them. Let’s make a deal.”

24 albusteve  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:37:31pm

re: #21 brookly red

get a real job…

you mean like selling shoes?

25 engineer cat  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:37:50pm

Raging Duck Congress Passes New START

…while the Klown Kongress is already waiting in the wings putting on its makeup…

26 albusteve  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:38:39pm

re: #23 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

As resources become limited, expect more of a “poison the well” approach.
“You might be able to outnumber us in the field, but we’ll burn our lands to radioactive cinder rather than let you have them. Let’s make a deal.”

novel idea…some of Alexanders foes did that 2500 years ago

27 brookly red  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:39:13pm

re: #22 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

I’m not sure we have enough to destroy the world. Certainly enough to kill everybody, but I still think a big ole gray ball’d be orbiting the sun for a while.

China set a good example… “we have enough to deter”.

What good is negotiating with the Russians who don’t want to get blown up any more than we do?

We need to do more to convince other “ambitious” powers that steeping up to us (with a nuke) is not in their best interests.

28 Kragar  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:39:34pm

re: #26 albusteve

novel idea…some of Alexanders foes did that 2500 years ago

The classics never get old.

29 Kragar  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:40:56pm

South Korean Military Prepares for Largest-Ever Live-Fire Drill

South Korea’s army and air force are preparing to hold their largest-ever live-fire exercise on Thursday near the inter-Korean border, as Seoul remains on high alert for any attacks by North Korea.

A South Korean officer says the drill at the Pocheon firing range, 20 kilometers south of the border, is a response to North Korea’s deadly shelling of South Korea’s Yeonpyeong island last month. South Korean General Ju Eun-shik says Seoul will “completely punish” the North if it retaliates militarily for the drill.

30 albusteve  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:41:00pm

re: #28 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

The classics never get old.

lol!

31 brookly red  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:44:19pm

re: #29 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

South Korean Military Prepares for Largest-Ever Live-Fire Drill

well here is a good what if question… if the North were to nuke the South, we would?

32 reloadingisnotahobby  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:46:17pm

re: #31 brookly red

well here is a good what if question… if the North were to nuke the South, we would?


How about a multiple chose…..
I could get right if it were!!

33 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:46:19pm

re: #29 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

South Korean Military Prepares for Largest-Ever Live-Fire Drill

There’d be a funny joke there if it was the Chinese.

34 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:47:00pm

re: #31 brookly red

well here is a good what if question… if the North were to nuke the South, we would?

Bail out Hyundai?
/

35 Kragar  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:47:37pm

re: #31 brookly red

well here is a good what if question… if the North were to nuke the South, we would?

Considering we have troops stationed in South Korea, our treaties would probably consider it as an act of war against the US as well.

36 albusteve  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:48:32pm

re: #31 brookly red

well here is a good what if question… if the North were to nuke the South, we would?

maybe the Chinese?….nobody seems to view them as much more than a pain in the ass

37 brookly red  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:48:47pm

re: #32 reloadingisnotahobby

How about a multiple chose…
I could get right if it were!!

OK.
a. nuke em back
b. not nuke em back
c. send a strongly worded letter to the U.N.
d. sell short & buy gold.

38 brookly red  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:49:27pm

re: #35 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Considering we have troops stationed in South Korea, our treaties would probably consider it as an act of war against the US as well.

and so?

39 reloadingisnotahobby  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:49:35pm

re: #37 brookly red


b and d…..That’s my final answer!

40 Kragar  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:50:59pm

re: #38 brookly red

and so?

Full alert on all our bases in Japan, all naval assets in the Pacific redirected. South Korea would likely begin an immeadiate counter offensive.

41 brookly red  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:51:35pm

re: #39 reloadingisnotahobby

b and d…That’s my final answer!

Gosh… b and d? where is LVQ when we need him?

42 brookly red  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:52:09pm

re: #40 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Full alert on all our bases in Japan, all naval assets in the Pacific redirected. South Korea would likely begin an immeadiate counter offensive.

and? do we or do we not?

43 reloadingisnotahobby  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:53:08pm

re: #42 brookly red

and? do we or do we not?

Go Nuke??
Never….Everything short of it!

44 brookly red  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:54:18pm

re: #43 reloadingisnotahobby

Go Nuke??
Never…Everything short of it!

then what is the point? if we will not use then why bother having them?

45 RogueOne  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:55:50pm

Not to be rude to all the hard work put into this treaty but this feels like a huge story….if it were 1983. I actually heard senators argue that without this treaty we were looking at a nuclear arms race with the Russians. That’s just absurd. I don’t think it’s a horrible deal and we’re all going to suffer terribly, just that the whole thing feels dated. A big hooray signifying nothing.

46 reloadingisnotahobby  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:55:57pm

re: #44 brookly red

The question was we…U.S.!!
S.K. can pull the trigger with tacticals and we keep or hands clean…so to speak!

47 Kragar  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:56:32pm

Actually, NK provides one of the rare instances where tactical nuclear weapons are a valid option. In an already nuclear active battlefied, large numbers of ground forces in a small geographic region, constrained by terrain, nukes would be highly effective against them.

48 brookly red  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:57:04pm

re: #46 reloadingisnotahobby

The question was we…U.S.!!
S.K. can pull the trigger with tacticals and we keep or hands clean…so to speak!

do they officially have them?

49 albusteve  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:57:36pm

re: #43 reloadingisnotahobby

Go Nuke??
Never…Everything short of it!

and continue the bloodbath with no clear winner?…I’d have to think about that for about a NY second

50 RogueOne  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:57:38pm

re: #35 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Considering we have troops stationed in South Korea, our treaties would probably consider it as an act of war against the US as well.

That’s the sole purpose of those troops.

51 Kragar  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:58:37pm

re: #50 RogueOne

That’s the sole purpose of those troops.

No, we’re advisors.
///

52 reloadingisnotahobby  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:59:04pm

re: #48 brookly red

do they officially have them?

I would think they have them …..or would have them very quickly!

53 albusteve  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 1:59:39pm

re: #45 RogueOne

Not to be rude to all the hard work put into this treaty but this feels like a huge story…if it were 1983. I actually heard senators argue that without this treaty we were looking at a nuclear arms race with the Russians. That’s just absurd. I don’t think it’s a horrible deal and we’re all going to suffer terribly, just that the whole thing feels dated. A big hooray signifying nothing.

me too…what’s the big whoop?….Putin is not exactly a guy you can trust unless maybe there is more in it for them, than for us….security is an illusion

54 RogueOne  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 2:01:05pm

re: #51 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

No, we’re advisors.
///

It’s actually pretty harsh when you think about it. Those guys up front are there to get run over and they know it. If it came to war it wouldn’t last long but you wouldn’t want to be anywhere near that line if the shit hit the fan.

55 brookly red  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 2:01:31pm

re: #52 reloadingisnotahobby

I would think they have them …or would have them very quickly!

well officially they don’t. so if they just happened to show up, how would that leave us the “clean hands” you speak of?

56 RogueOne  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 2:01:54pm

re: #53 albusteve

me too…what’s the big whoop?…Putin is not exactly a guy you can trust unless maybe there is more in it for them, than for us…security is an illusion

They’re not in the business of selling them to crazies but if they wanted to this treaty certainly isn’t going to stop them.

57 albusteve  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 2:03:22pm

re: #56 RogueOne

They’re not in the business of selling them to crazies but if they wanted to this treaty certainly isn’t going to stop them.

how do you know?…is every nuke accounted for in Russia and her old stomping grounds?….probably not

58 albusteve  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 2:04:35pm

re: #55 brookly red

well officially they don’t. so if they just happened to show up, how would that leave us the “clean hands” you speak of?

deals within deals until Paraguay takes the blame….it was on TV

59 brookly red  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 2:05:06pm

well everyday nuclear tech spreads… some day it may be used against us. if the unthinkable happens do we have the balls to do what needs to be done?

it is a y/n question btw…

60 reloadingisnotahobby  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 2:06:29pm

re: #55 brookly red

It clearly wouldn’t…
If the North attacks..nukes and all I think no one would deny them using evrything they’ve got. Our Fleet backing them up would be an epic battle.

61 albusteve  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 2:06:34pm

re: #56 RogueOne

They’re not in the business of selling them to crazies but if they wanted to this treaty certainly isn’t going to stop them.

stuff like this all over the net for years…
[Link: english.pravda.ru…]

62 Ericus58  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 2:08:14pm

re: #54 RogueOne

It’s actually pretty harsh when you think about it. Those guys up front are there to get run over and they know it. If it came to war it wouldn’t last long but you wouldn’t want to be anywhere near that line if the shit hit the fan.

[Link: us-bases.com…]

63 reloadingisnotahobby  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 2:08:15pm

re: #59 brookly red


With the Administration as it is??
I would say no.

64 brookly red  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 2:08:21pm

re: #60 reloadingisnotahobby

It clearly wouldn’t…
If the North attacks..nukes and all I think no one would deny them using evrything they’ve got. Our Fleet backing them up would be an epic battle.

no, it would be a dust off if went down…

65 brookly red  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 2:10:21pm

re: #63 reloadingisnotahobby

With the Administration as it is??
I would say no.

well I didn’t want to get political on such an important issue… but as much as I don’t like the current admin. I think they would do what was required.

66 albusteve  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 2:11:01pm

even wikileaks was involved with this story of rogue nukes….
[Link: english.pravda.ru…]

some scary shit

67 reloadingisnotahobby  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 2:11:51pm

re: #65 brookly red

well I didn’t want to get political on such an important issue… but as much as I don’t like the current admin. I think they would do what was required.

I would hope too!!
…Being President can really suck….

68 albusteve  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 2:12:54pm

re: #65 brookly red

well I didn’t want to get political on such an important issue… but as much as I don’t like the current admin. I think they would do what was required.

he would have to or resign ahead of a huge shitstorm

69 reloadingisnotahobby  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 2:14:26pm

I’m going home !
Have a great weeknd and Merry Christmas!

70 brookly red  Wed, Dec 22, 2010 2:16:20pm

re: #68 albusteve

he would have to or resign ahead of a huge shitstorm

Maybe. Now what if the shit hits the fan in the Koreas, and the Chinese say hey, this is a great time to move on Taiwan! Do we fight?


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ...
Cheechako
4 weeks ago
Views: 461 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1