"Iran now ready to double its Uranium enrichment." - U.N.

[SuperMechatronGamer]

Pretty sure you missed them then. All but one source was independent.

Independent sources quoting US generals, the CIA, and a British prime minister? Lol...

[RICH1471]

Uhh.....

Just as an example to illustrate,
10 countries out of 20 have nukes, 10/20, = 1/2
6/20 countries have nukes, 3/10, = 1/3

So....do you understand now? (Have you ever taken probability or data management or math?) 'X' +1 is greater than 'X', therefore the chance of 'X' is higher than before. Applying it to this situation means the risk of a nuke going off increases. It doesn't stay the same.

Kind of missed the point there, I am saying we are already ignoring dangerous countries that already have working nukes. Instead we are starting another WMD hunt for a country that doesnt even have a single one yet.

[chadwix]

Uh....no?

^ Frank, Downfall, p. 135–7.
^ The Final Months of the War With Japan. Part III, note 24 https://www.cia.gov/library/center-f...001.html#rtoc7
^ Carroll, James (2007). House of War: The Pentagon and the Disastrous Rise of American Power. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. p. 48. ISBN 0-618-87201-9.
^ Skates, John Ray (2000). The Invasion of Japan: Alternative to the Bomb. University of South Carolina Press. p. 79. ISBN 1570033544.

Yes, clearly those are opinion articles.

You should watch a movie called "Hoodwinked", there are three sides to every story

[Raybourne]

Iran could claim that they prevented WW3, and saved millions of lives on both sides.

How so? Iran is the one instigating these affairs by increasing their nuclear capability and threatening others.

---------- Post added 2012-11-16 at 08:17 PM ----------

Kind of missed the point there, I am saying we are already ignoring dangerous countries that already have working nukes. Instead we are starting another WMD hunt for a country that doesnt even have a single one yet.

Do you know probability?

50% chance
60% chance

which is higher?

which is more likely to happen?

if event 'X' is bad, ...... you fill it in.....please.

[Butler Log]

How so? Iran is the one instigating these affairs by increasing their nuclear capability and threatening others.

---------- Post added 2012-11-16 at 08:17 PM ----------



Do you know probability?

50% chance
60% chance

which is higher?

which is more likely to happen?

if event 'X' is bad, ...... you fill it in.....please.

How many times has there been a "90% chance of rain" and it not rained?

[SuperMechatronGamer]

Uhh.....

Just as an example to illustrate,
10 countries out of 20 have nukes, 10/20, = 1/2
6/20 countries have nukes, 3/10, = 1/3

So....do you understand now? (Have you ever taken probability or data management or math?) 'X' +1 is greater than 'X', therefore the chance of 'X' is higher than before. Applying it to this situation means the risk of a nuke going off increases. It doesn't stay the same.

Uh.....no. That's not how it works kiddo...

You can't make up some painfully simplistic probability equation and expect that to be applicable to real world scenarios.

Go read up on MAD doctrine, you might learn something.

[Reeve]

How did this thread become about the morality of dropping the A-Bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima? I went to the bathroom and came back, and good god...

[lazymangaka]

Israel scares me way more than Iran does.

[chadwix]

How so? Iran is the one instigating these affairs by increasing their nuclear capability and threatening others.

---------- Post added 2012-11-16 at 08:17 PM ----------



Do you know probability?

50% chance
60% chance

which is higher?

which is more likely to happen?

if event 'X' is bad, ...... you fill it in.....please.

They claim to use it for medical reasons and the likelyhood that it can get to 90% (wep grade) isnt probable. Im curious why the UN has an opinion in this matter, they arent wmd's, yet iraq was the same thing and bashed on bush. UN is useless and bias.

[nailbomb]

I am not in the US military, I hold the rank of Captain in the British Army and I pick up my Majors rank next year.

while posting 5000 times on this website alone in one year, looks like you'll reach Armchair General first ... fuk me , we're doomed

[gruyaka]

UN is useless and bias.

You're preaching to the choir.

[Butler Log]

while posting 5000 times on this website alone in one year, looks like you'll reach Armchair General first ... fuk me , we're doomed

At least he is in the military...

[Bubalus]

Protip: The amount of purple hearts we made just for the Invasion of Japan was used through the Gulf War. And that was just US casualties.

It's pretty much common sense that the Japanese would attempt to stave off an invasion in one of the bloodiest battles mankind has ever seen. It would have made Gettysburg look like a dinner party.

That excuse is old , everyone knows that Japan was already on the verge of surrender, invading Japan would not have been needed and all the people in power were damn well aware of that.
"It always appeared to us that, atomic bomb or no atomic bomb, the Japanese were already on the verge of collapse." - General Henry H. Arnold
"Japan was at the moment seeking some way to surrender with minimum loss of 'face'. It wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing." - General Dwight D. Eisenhower
"P.M. [Churchill} & I ate alone. Discussed Manhattan (it is a success). Decided to tell Stalin about it. Stalin had told P.M. of telegram from Jap Emperor asking for peace." - President Harry S. Truman
The US wanted to use that bomb in the field , show their new toy off to the soviets and so they used it.

[RICH1471]

while posting 5000 times on this website alone in one year, looks like you'll reach Armchair General first ... fuk me , we're doomed

Actually think officers do any real work when not deployed? Garrison duties are boring as hell and leave a lot of free time.

[Raybourne]

Uh.....no. That's not how it works kiddo...

You can't make up some painfully simplistic probability equation and expect that to be applicable to real world scenarios.

Go read up on MAD doctrine, you might learn something.

Go look up.....math? You might learn that one more country having a nuke isn't the same as before. How daft can one be to not understand this?

[Beavis]

Uhh.....

Just as an example to illustrate,
10 countries out of 20 have nukes, 10/20, = 1/2
6/20 countries have nukes, 3/10, = 1/3

So....do you understand now? (Have you ever taken probability or data management or math?) 'X' +1 is greater than 'X', therefore the chance of 'X' is higher than before. Applying it to this situation means the risk of a nuke going off increases. It doesn't stay the same.

Most modern deterrence models only have two stable equalibria: X=0 and X=N. So, there's really no reason to think X+1 is going have a significant impact on the stability of the system.

[Sealed Shut]

This thread is a perfect example of what the left (in the states) do about every issue they can't defend. They change the focus on the conversation and try to put you on the defensive. The past is the past. This is a discussion about the present and the possible future outcome of an Iran with nuclear weapons. Derailing the entire thread so you can avoid the topic is asinine.

[nailbomb]

At least he is in the military...

So am i?...

[Reeve]

This thread is a perfect example of what the left (in the states) do about every issue they can't defend. They change the focus on the conversation and try to put you on the defensive. The past is the past. This is a discussion about the present and the possible future outcome of an Iran with nuclear weapons. Derailing the entire thread so you can avoid the topic is asinine.

Because coming into a nonpartisan thread to make it about left vs. right is so much better.

[Rukentuts]

Most modern deterrence models only have two stable equalibria: X=0 and X=N. So, there's really no reason to think X+1 is going have a significant impact on the stability of the system.

When the +1 has no fear of death, it does change the equation. It kinda defeats MAD.

MAD only works when both sides fear destruction.