ThePest179

And you drew this conclusion how? The Soviets were following the terms set by the Yalta and Postdam conferences, so politically, they were just acting how they should have.

I take this means you're burying the hatchet for about 20 years. Anyway, I recently found out that if the Pacific front lasted a few more weeks, the Soviet Union would have leaped on Hokkaido (northernmost of the Japanese home islands), created their own NK style government there. This could have affected the Cold War drastically, even effecting the outcome of the Korean War. I would like to hear your opinion on the matter.

I don't oppose WMD, I just fear them. I do nothing as I am an opponent of world peace (because I know it is impossible and unnatural). Anything to keep people killing each other.

All I have to say to that is bullshit. That's what it is, bullshit.

If they detonated the nuke after the battle, it would cause significant damage to their enemies, as when their country is invaded, they know the will not win and will surely be wiped out. And as for your claim of Navy Seal forces being able to take out their army, it is downright impossible, period.

That's for me to know.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisis_in_the_Kremlin

DO NOT TRUST MACHINIMA. LEAVE THEM.

The ironic part would be if everyone was listing, but not communicating. I think most extraterrestrials are dead by now though.

Hence the deployment of nuclear submarines on a near daily basis. Maybe Isreal needs fleets of nuclear submarines. Wait, why are we discussing this? The US could provide for Isreal's second strike capability. Isreal wouldn't need nuclear weapons with a strong US backing (like as strong as SK relations).

I never thought about it before, but what would be the affect of Climate Change? This is a Global Warming kind of change. I figure that Global Warming/Climate Change might inadvertanly cause a mass famine and turn some areas into an unliveable desert with horrible dust storms that worsen the famine, but overall I do not consider Climate Change to be too significant, as this is a worst of the worst case scenarios. Of course, I never talked about an Overpopulation crisis, witch would inadvertanly cause a famine and possibly kill us off. Then again, these both don't seem likely until about 30 years from now, and both will probably not result in extinction.

The average American soldier had better equipment than their Japanese counterparts (US soldier has a Thompson, Japanese soldier has an Arisaka rifle (bolt action rifle)), not to mention better tanks, planes, and ships (well, over time). From what I know though, NK has a heavily trained force ready to defend their country with chemical and nuclear weapons. Which begs a question, why doesn't NK give their WMD to terrorists? Even if the US traces the weapon back to NK, they could claim it was stolen form them.

No, their leaders fear it, but most of their people do not.

He could have initiated the nuclear holocaust by nuking two cities, then fleeing the country before the second strike. Anyway, I still think we should follow a containment policy with Iran and give Isreal all it needs to initiate a second strike should there be a nuclear Holocaust (like nuclear submarines).

Of course. Not a single person will care or consider something unless it is upon them.

I think I know what NK is like. there're like Imperial Japan. both had a large army, a totalitarian system, high morale among the troops, a "never surrender" attitude, chemical weapons, anti-US feelings, and some other things I probably missed.

You realise that an Iran-Iraq nuclear war would have destroyed both countries, therefore solving both of Saddam's problems at once, right?

Yes, definately.

How about the possibility of chemical terrorism?

Now that I think about it, if Saddam was not attacked by NATO, he would probably have pursued nuclear weapons and could have destroyed Iran, and what was left of it would retaliate, meaning both nations would have perised under radioactive ashes, leaving both problems gone and away from the US, and would not create a Isreal-Iran cold war that could develop into a hot war. Who eles thinks the same?

What I honestly fear the most is that one of many Cold War nukes might be missing and open for use, and that WMD are easily obtainable by a terrorist organization or nation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict:_Middle_East_Political_Simulator

Okay, now there are CONFIRMED reports of chemical warfare in Syria. They crossed the "red line", and the West STILL will not help. What the hell does it take to get NATO to get off their asses and do something?

This is fucking ridiculous. Let me use a metaphor for this situation: NK wants all US troops to leave SK, and demands reunification under their control. The US agrees to withdrawl their troops from SK but announces that if Korea is reunifyed by the Communists, it would be an immediate declaration of war on NATO. NK is backed by China and Russia, and SK by NATO.

You're both acting like trolls and getting this topic sidetracked.