If you could nuke a country?

Frenzy107

New member
Aug 29, 2011
19
0
0
Antarctica, then i can take my mutated arctic animals and take over the world! Come my mutant penguins!
 

Kl4pp5tuhl

New member
Apr 15, 2009
136
0
0
First, I'd make sure the nukes would be weak enough to only destroy a small city. No reason to nuke a state, most of the people in the nuclear crossfire might not even deserve it.

North Korea is a good example for a target, but those who suggested it aren't considering what that means. It's not the people's fault they're being brainwashed by their own militant government. They're starving because thanks to their oh-so-great-dam they can't farm rice to feed their own people. If it wasn't for the resources they bribe out of other countries by threatening them, they'd be starving a lot more. I'd nuke the military staff in Pyongyang and down Checkpoint Charlie, opening the borders between South and North Korea. But maybe Kim Yong Ill's son will do just the right thing and get into peace talks with South Korea on his own. Here's hoping.

Then there's Iraq/Iran/Syria (Sorry), but that again puts innocents at risk, and I'd do nothing different than what is happening in those places already, except crank it to eleven. Yes, most of them go nuts now over the koran-burnings that took place (even though no other country so far complained about all the burning flags so far, flag-vendors must love this), but again, brainwashed into false security, this time via religion. So a mini nuke for each of their governments. Better check your seat twice in parliament next time.

Also on the list, yes, America. However, since there's no government left what-so-ever, certain CEO's of corporations and the real behind-the-scenes jerks get some grade A Gamma bursts (Wait, do they prepare for that? Is that why they all usually have the fried-chicken-brown tan? o_O).

There's also Russia, but that could trigger WW3. While Americans would hold back from firing straight away (even though the nukes are falling apart, hence two new reactors, yay -.-) because the F22's are grounded, the nautical fleet close to the drydock for repairs and the troops just came home from a war. No one in the military will enter another one for some time now. But Russia's Government wouldn't care that much about the aftermath as it would about prestige in their political ranks. So, again, it's down to Putin. As in under the seat.

In the long run, a nuke isn't even cost effective for the task at hand. It would only take a couple well placed shots from a drone/siper rifle. The only ones hit are usually never the real men behind the curtains.

Then again, I don't even need a nuke or assassins. At this point in our capital system, all you'd have to do is Hyperinflate a couple of resources on the stock market, drive people to withdraw their money from banks, and then start robbing houses when no one is home. Then burn the cash.

All of it.

Oh wait, you meant it jokingly who I'd nuke?

Umm, no one.
 

Pinkamena

Stuck in a vortex of sexy horses
Jun 27, 2011
2,371
0
0
370999 said:
SNIP

Interestingly enough when ole Herman Kahn wrote On Thermonuclear War a lot of individuals saw it as being horrific as the very act of thinking and talking about nuclear war made it more likely. Of course another group of people actually really reccomended his book as a strong argument for disarmament.

However notice the difference between the concept of "how would you murder someone?" and "who would your murder?"? This thread isn't about how you would commit a nuclear war but against how would you drop a nuclear device against if they had no ability to retaliate. The emphasis is very much not on the art of the operation but on who the poster believes deserves a terrorist atrocity the most.
Ah, you're right about that. I think that's wrong as well, and I haven't got any "special country" in my head that I think deserves to be nuked. It would be fun to nuke North Korea, but I don't think they deserve it. I'd just do it to see how they'd react, not because I feel they deserve to be destroyed.
 

TheBoulder

New member
Nov 11, 2009
415
0
0
South Africa. Seriously, that country is a shithole and the world would be better off without it.
 

370999

New member
May 17, 2010
1,107
0
0
Pinkamena said:
370999 said:
SNIP

Interestingly enough when ole Herman Kahn wrote On Thermonuclear War a lot of individuals saw it as being horrific as the very act of thinking and talking about nuclear war made it more likely. Of course another group of people actually really reccomended his book as a strong argument for disarmament.

However notice the difference between the concept of "how would you murder someone?" and "who would your murder?"? This thread isn't about how you would commit a nuclear war but against how would you drop a nuclear device against if they had no ability to retaliate. The emphasis is very much not on the art of the operation but on who the poster believes deserves a terrorist atrocity the most.
Ah, you're right about that. I think that's wrong as well, and I haven't got any "special country" in my head that I think deserves to be nuked. It would be fun to nuke North Korea, but I don't think they deserve it. I'd just do it to see how they'd react, not because I feel they deserve to be destroyed.
I hope you can understand why individuals feel a bit nervous when you throw nuclear and fun in the same sentence. War is a tragedy. I'm not a pacifist so I believe sometimes it's a necessary tragedy, a preferable one but nuclear war is even greater. Now I would concede there are certain situations where nuclear war is probably not only logically but morally just. Possibly.

But casually talking about nuking a country is well, it's in bad taste for me.

Even say North Korea which has a shitty government, I feel sympathy for the people. I certainly don't want them to die.

So I'm out. I'm sorry but I just can't engage in this conversation without losing my temper.
 

Pinkamena

Stuck in a vortex of sexy horses
Jun 27, 2011
2,371
0
0
370999 said:
I hope you can understand why individuals feel a bit nervous when you throw nuclear and fun in the same sentence. War is a tragedy. I'm not a pacifist so I believe sometimes it's a necessary tragedy, a preferable one but nuclear war is even greater. Now I would concede there are certain situations where nuclear war is probably not only logically but morally just. Possibly.

But casually talking about nuking a country is well, it's in bad taste for me.

Even say North Korea which has a shitty government, I feel sympathy for the people. I certainly don't want them to die.

So I'm out. I'm sorry but I just can't engage in this conversation without losing my temper.
Well, I guess that's it for this conversation. Let me just say that I agree on you on most of those things. But I still think it would be interesting to see how a country like north korea would react to getting bombed. Yes, it would be a horrible, horrible thing, but I can't say I wouldn't be excited about it.
 

The White Hunter

Basment Abomination
Oct 19, 2011
3,888
0
0
ChromaticWolfen said:
Ireland. I sick of living here for so long. I want to go back to the British Empire. Home is where the heart is. My heart tells me to nuke Ireland so that it would force my parents to move back to England so that I may live there forever more.
You sir are a man after my own heart.
I'd also nuke Ireland.
For different reasons.
Or at least say "you are now part of our empire, obey or die." > >
 

Convoy

New member
Dec 30, 2011
70
0
0
I'm an American, I'd nuke my own country and Israel. For world peace. I'd have a statue in my honor.
 

DoPo

"You're not cleared for that."
Jan 30, 2012
8,665
0
0
Razada said:
This thread is akin to asking "If you could put the people of any given nation into a camp similar to Auschwitz, what would you do?"
A cake? I can make a cake.

But I see how that isn't as funny.
 

Monkeyman O'Brien

New member
Jan 27, 2012
427
0
0
The US. Probably New York. Just because I would love to give them a taste of their own medicine and maybe the threat of further attacks would get them to stop acting like world police.
 

dobahci

New member
Jan 25, 2012
148
0
0
Monkeyman O said:
The US. Probably New York. Just because I would love to give them a taste of their own medicine and maybe the threat of further attacks would get them to stop acting like world police.
More than likely it would have the opposite effect. New York got attacked once already, and the US's response was to invade two countries.
 

DarthFennec

New member
May 27, 2010
1,154
0
0
Nuking ... countries ... why? Nobody deserves that, and no country has ever done anything to me ...
 

Clive Howlitzer

New member
Jan 27, 2011
2,783
0
0
Even if I could nuke any country, I wouldn't. Why would I want to bring about that level of destruction on anyone? Nice to know everyone here has such genocidal thoughts.
 

Fenix7

New member
Jun 14, 2011
121
0
0
I live in Iran and came to this thread solely to see how many "Iran" replies there were going to be, and I'm positively surprised there aren't that many! Congratulations Escapist for having a low density of simpletons that believe everything the media spoonfeeds to them.

As for the question, nowhere. I'd rather die 10 times over. Living with the innocent blood of millions of people on my hands is not something I am able to do. Nukes are retarded weapons and should have never existed.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
I wouldn't nuke a country. I would demand all major nations pay me an obscene amount of money OR they would be first.

Mwahahahahahahahaha
 

ablac

New member
Aug 4, 2009
350
0
0
Considering all nations mostly consist of innocents I wouldnt nuke any. For fun however lets nuke France. Im British what else do yu expect.
 

DarthFennec

New member
May 27, 2010
1,154
0
0
Monkeyman O said:
The US. Probably New York. Just because I would love to give them a taste of their own medicine and maybe the threat of further attacks would get them to stop acting like world police.
... yeah, you obviously don't know the US very well lol. The main reason we're acting like world police right now in the first place is because over a decade ago some douche flew a plane into one building in New York, so I'm pretty sure a nuke would just make it that much worse ...