Take a break on bashing Bush on war, and try another flavor

Your quote, "Since when are we aloud to carry WMD and police other developing third-world nations about it? I've heard the argument that we are one of the only nations to have the sense not to use them." Notice how Bush keeps insisting that Saddam used WMD's on his own people, while we ignore the use of nukes against Japan? His argument is so full of holes, I wonder why nobody seems to challenge this bozo.

I am a little isolated here on a2k as not sooo politically astute, though I could drag up links if pushed. But I am particularly perturbed about bombing, the nature of bombing, the use of bombs as weapons, and so on. Bombs do no damn good, and wreak vengence at the least, never mind ecologic nuances.

I am not just a peacenik. My father was in the plane that photo'd, for the first time, down into an atom bomb cloud.
I don't like them. And certainly I wouldn't have liked them, if I was cognizant, bombing a city (cities).. I would have been four.

Whatever are we thinking, that this kind of thing helps anything?

osso, To bring you up to date, if you haven't already heard, Bush is trying to get funding for developing a low yield nuke bomb. This dodo of a president is dangerous to this whole planet, but what's more disturbing is that half of Americans believe what this president is doing in our name is okay.

Yeah, it's a ground penetrating low yield bunker buster. They want to do research on it. By the response, you would think they were asking for money to torture kittens.

No, I hadn't heard that, this is painful news.

I appreciate, even love, science, and know there was excitement scientifically in the beginning of all this weapons development, and now, today. And I was never really attracted to any non-weapons groups (though, y'know, they were probably right), if and when I ever ran across them. Still, this is all in the wrong direction.

It reminds me of my take on the festival in the city of Ivrea, or better, the Palio in Siena. The contradas, or neighborhoods there, were formed centuries ago. At one point I knew the history, somewhat. (I am not Setanta). Anyway, there is an imbedded panoply twice a year in Siena, a horse race run twice, a month or so apart. Ninety seconds, not good for the horses or riders either. There are seventeen contradas in the city, and ten get chosen in a preliminary round for the race. The race is dirty from the start, it is so dirty you can't figure it. There are neighborhood celebrations first, and parades,and, geez, the winning horse gets his oats in some golden bag, I read. Riders don't count, as they fall off, it is the horse that gets there first that wins.

But, in an article I have saved for years, from the NYer in 1987, by someone whose name I will post if I can snag it, there hadn't been a murder in Siena in 35 years. Surmise, perhaps, that antagonisms are channeled.

Point... for me, anyway, is that this all is, at least sometimes, a societal safety valve.

Ivrea has orange hurling.

could we not rearrange the world into sports?

Bombs. Bombs are obscene.

And they kill indiscriminately.

Well, they used to. Back before the precision-guided variety was invented they weren't so accurate.

Depends on one's definition of "accurate." For me, one innocent life lost by precision-guided bombs is not accurate.

My wife and sons are very precious to me. I'm sure that one innocent life is precious to somebody. Killing another is only justified in self defense or for the greater good of humanity and all life.

Back before precision guided variety...

Precision isn't all so precise, and if that is your home you won't like the drop.in. Your grandchildren may be energized, having been dropped in on.

I don't have the answer here. It is really late to win any hearts and minds.

I was, originally, when I was a teen, pleased that my country had fighting might.

I wish it wasn't so misapplied in my lifetime, which was once I paid attention.

I am still for my country, would like to see it reequilibrate.

What in christ's name does the US need MORE nuc's for? Isn't the ability to destroy the planet 20 times over enough?

Consider the apocalyptic mindset of Bush and his core constitutency. They look forward to the "last battle." What does that tell you about the person in charge of the missiles?

Or, cough, the budget. Not my first concern, but easily my second.

It tells me that a certain poster is fond of hyperbole.

I have asked the same question seeral times before, and I might have a slightly logical explanation:

The need to make sure that they have so many nukes, that if 90% of our striking capabilities are gone, we can still knock the rest of the world out of the sky in an attempt to get at our enemies.
That make any sense what so ever?


Any on seen "Doctor Strangelove"?

I also worked with nukes in the US Air Force, SAC, and I don't believe in developing more nukes for any reason. As somebody already opined, we have enough to destroy this planet 20 times over. Even a fraction of one percent over what we already have is overkill. Precision? Don't make me laugh.

Maybe by precision they mean, "able to land the nuke with in a hundred yards of the target".
Not "able to waste and destroy everything around and including the target, making sure we hit it, so that no matter how inacurate we are, its deffinatly gone".

Some peoples value for human life makes me want to barf.

Low-Yield Earth Penetrating Weapons

Interesting Article here to look at.