Do You Support Nuclear Weapons?

[Iacobus]

[img]http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/inflation.gif[/img]

Yes, oh yes, I love having my Debt increase by trillions of dollars.

[quote]This, in essence, was the Reagan Doctrine: economic and political support for insurgent movements in third world countries where Marxism had been instigated.[/quote]

:Cough: Can you say terrorism? That is where all of those guys got their training, funds, weapons, start. If you think Reagan was great because the USSR folded before the US disolved fiscial, than I really have to question your logic.

[quote]"I have seen how easy it is for nuclear contamination to occur, and how hard it is to clean it up.... Do nations possess nuclear, chemical and biological weapons because of fear of attack from some other nation, or is it mainly because without them the stronger cannot otherwise exploit the weaker?" -- Andreas Toupadakis[/quote]

[Socrates]

Omigawd, Iacabus!!! That's horrible!

I mean the increase in the national debt is so much more horrific than the (largely bloodless) defeat of the most horrific and bloody tyranny in the history of mankind and the collapse of the threat of global Communism!!!

Here's to Ronald Reagan and the defeat of the Evil Empire!

(We'll leave Iacobus and his pinko lib buddies to listen to NPR and morosely ponder the tragic loss of the Soviet Union and over 50 years of slavery, terror, purges, government forced famines, the Gulag, and all those other wonders of Soviet Communism).

Edited January 23, 2005 by Socrates

[Socrates]

Omigawd, Iacabus!!! That's horrible!

I mean the increase in the national debt is so much more significant than the (largely bloodless) defeat of the most horrific and bloody tyranny in the history of mankind and the collapse of the threat of global Communism!!!

Here's to Ronald Reagan and the defeat of the Evil Empire!

(We'll leave Iacobus and his pinko lib buddies to listen to NPR and morosely ponder the tragic loss of the Soviet Union and over 50 years of slavery, terror, purges, government forced famines, the Gulag, and all those other wonders of Soviet Communism).

[noticed I kind of screwed up part of this post, but was too late to edit, so this should make a little more sense]

Edited January 25, 2005 by Socrates

[crusader1234]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Jan 22 2005, 08:50 PM'] The U.S. rawked in the '80s! Look at the disaster that was the Soviet Union (widespread povery - I mean REAL poverty, like we don't know here, environmental disaster, etc.)! Don't tell me we were pretty much the same. Get away from your NPR, dude, and start looking at the facts of history.

Too bad you miss the USSR!
For the life of me, I will never understand these pinkos!

The Cold War is over and we won! [/quote]
First of all, save 'rawk' for Emo music. Saying you 'rawked' when referring to a war/arms race/etc. isn't cool. Millions of people could have died..

And it also appears you've chosen to ignore what Iacobus was saying and simply decide he's a pinko. Might I add that pinko isn't exactly a great word to be used in debate? Anyways, Iacobus was right. The Cold War drove the USA into deeper debt, and it could easily have gone either way.

And, for the life of [i]me[/i], I can't understand where [u]you[/u] get the idea that Iacobus misses the USSR.

God Bless,

Rich

[crusader1234]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Jan 25 2005, 03:40 PM'] Omigawd, Iacabus!!! That's horrible! [/quote]
Yes, Trillions of dollars of debt is terrible.

[quote]I mean the increase in the national debt is so much more significant than the (largely bloodless) defeat of the most horrific and bloody tyranny in the history of mankind and the collapse of the threat of global Communism!!![/quote]

Again, it was never certain who was going to win the arms race. Also, what exactly makes the USSR the most horrific and bloody tyrrany in the history of mankind? Did somebody rip all the pages out of your history textbook?

[quote]Here's to Ronald Reagan and the defeat of the Evil Empire!  [/quote]

I think your humorous attitude in this line speaks for itself.

[quote](We'll leave Iacobus and his pinko lib buddies to listen to NPR and morosely ponder the tragic loss of the Soviet Union and over 50 years of slavery, terror, purges, government forced famines, the Gulag, and all those other wonders of Soviet Communism).
[/quote]

Again, where you get the idea tht Iacobus loves the USSR eludes me. I don't believe he ever said that.

[Socrates]

My main point is that the problem of the national debt absolutely pales in comparison with the evil of Soviet Communism.

Under Soviet Communism, many millions died in the Gulag, in the violence of the Soviet Revolution itself, in the insane "purges" by the government against political enemies real and imagined, in the horrendous forced famines in the Ukraine caused by Stalin's deliberate destruction/comfiscation of food supplies, in the violence sponsored by the Soviet Union around the world. The Soviet Empire was no peaceful force, but sought world domination by spreading a Communist empire around the world. Kruschnev in the 60s threatened to "bury" the U.S.

Add to this, the USSR's persecution of religion, and the widespread poverty and misery created by the tyrannical and insane economic policies.

The evil and murder done by the Soviets absolutely dwarfs that of Hitler and the Nazis.


I have a B.A. in history and have taken a class on the history communism, and am well aware of its horrors.

I don't currently have this with me, but I will get back later with the actual figures of the scale of murder waged by the Soviets, as I believe this is a very serious issue in history. Anyone who denies the evil of the Soviet communism is a liar or is grossly uninformed.

Whatever cost the U.S. payed was a very small one to defeat this horror.
Americans and all free people should be proud of this, not ashamed.
The collapse of Communism is worth celebrating.

Edited January 25, 2005 by Socrates

[crusader1234]

Nobody here is denying the horrors of the Soviet Union. I just don't understand where you get the idea that Iacobus is in love with it.

[Socrates]

[quote name='crusader1234' date='Jan 25 2005, 04:40 PM'] Nobody here is denying the horrors of the Soviet Union. I just don't understand where you get the idea that Iacobus is in love with it. [/quote]
You're the one who claimed I was ripping pages out of my history books.

I didn't claim Iacabus was in love with it - maybe I was being overly facecious - but liberals seem to prefer the existance of the Soviet Union to a Reagan presidency. I just don't think he (and likeminded liberals) have things in perspective.

This isn't Iacabus per se, but I know many liberals downplay the evils of Communism, and instead invest all their energy attacking and mocking American anti-Communists.


I'll return later.

[crusader1234]

Oh, I stand by my statements about it not being the worst in history. Hitler and the Nazi's, for example, to me are much worse.

(And this is coming from a Ukranian)

[Q the Ninja]

I do not support [i]the use of[/i] nuclear weapons. I do not think a Catholic ever could because it doesn't minimize the material participation in evil. That means, in simple terms, too much evil is done by the use of nuclear weapons.

[cathqat]

I consider Naziism and Communism pretty much comparable. Both are evil. Thanks to the two of them, about 100 million people were brutally slaughtered during the 20th century.... a million people for each of these skulls:

[img]http://www.geocities.com/johnaugus/skullrack.gif[/img] To anyone who's not read Michael Scammell's "The Price of an Idea: Where, when, and why 85 million people died," a review of the [i]Black Book of Communism[/i] by Courtois [i]et al.[/i], [url="http://www.tnr.com/122099/scammell122099.html"]I recommend that you click here[/url].

On the other hand, I'm not saying that the existence of either Naziism or Communism justifies the possession or use of nuclear weapons. That's one of the issues at hand.

Edited January 25, 2005 by cathqat

[Q the Ninja]

If you say that their existence promotes the use of nuclear weapons, that's just like saying that anything which promotes evil is good enough for the use of nuclear weapons.

?

There have most certainly been much worse things in the world, but when that becomes justification for grave evils, I'm going to pray for a swift death.

Edited January 26, 2005 by Q the Ninja

[Ellenita]

[quote]or WHAT if north korea decided to nuke us- we need to have some nukes just as retaliatory dont we? [/quote]

Assuming of course that there is someone left to push the button.....


[quote]I support nuclear weapons as a deterrent but not in actual use. Although, I do support the atomic bomb droppings on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I feel they were justified and furthermore represent a form of attack no less humane than the firebombings of Dresden and Tokyo which nobody seems to know about. [/quote]

The bombing and raising to the ground of Dresden was done in retaliation to the bombing of cities in the UK - in both cases causing massive loss of civilian life and little else in terms of the war....great example of deterrent....


[quote]Secondly, the Japanese wouldn't surrender until we dropped both Atomic bombs on them. Clearly, the decision to drop them was correct because otherwise we would have been involved in a messy invasion of the home islands. [/quote]

Actually there is evidence to suggest that Japan was considering a form of surrender - she was without doubt losing the war before the bomb was dropped, and without her allies could not have stood alone for long.

[Socrates]

[quote name='crusader1234' date='Jan 25 2005, 04:57 PM'] Oh, I stand by my statements about it not being the worst in history.  Hitler and the Nazi's, for example, to me are much worse.

(And this is coming from a Ukranian) [/quote]
Hitler and the Nazis murdered an estimated 12 million people, while Communism killed [i]at least 20 million people in the USSR alone![/i] (not counting China, Eastern Europe and other Communist countries).

We must never forget this when discussing 20th century history.

I am not saying this to minimize the evil of the Nazis, but to show how truly evil Soviet Communism was.

This is a fact the Left does not want to admit, as they consistently play down the evil of Communism and spend much time attacking anti-communism.
(I'd recommend [i]The Rise and Fall of the Communist Revolution[/i] , by Dr. Warren H. Carroll, for anyone interested in an in depth history.)

How were the Commies less to blame than the Nazis, Crusader 1234? Because they were somehow "good-intentioned"? They were certainly not less murderous and blood-thirsty.

I know some Ukrainians (from the Ukraine!) and they would beg to differ!

Edited January 26, 2005 by Socrates

[crusader1234]

I am by no means saying that the Communists aren't evil.