If you could nuke a country?
- Thread starter MrBaguette
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Sorry, what the hell makes them special?Caleco said:
Realistically, I wouldn't nuke anyone. It's fucking terrible, and it's hard to imagine circumstances in this day and age when a nuclear strike would be appropriate. But, if we're just idly speculating here...
I'd nuke Isreal and Palestine. And North Korea (it'd be a mercy killing for all their citizens anyway). Iran goes in the "maybe" pile.
Okay, I don't want to judge people, but do you realize that you are fantasizing about killing thousands of people? And you do this in public on the web?Caleco said:
lol Mongolia? There are millions of people there and this is a country with big history and heritage.Higgs303 said:
This is sick and selfish, but I'd opt for either China or India. This is assuming I absolutely have to nuke a country. The problem is that these countries have a huge amount of people and will probably get nuked one of these days anyways. That concentration of people breeds disease and social problems that could potentially affect us all. It would also maximize the amount of people instantly vaporized, rather than the countries that are more spread out, causing people to slowly die of burns and radiation sickness.
Japan might be an even better choice geographically. Consider their recent meltdown, where the fallout mostly went over the ocean and didn't affect neighboring countries.
Japan might be an even better choice geographically. Consider their recent meltdown, where the fallout mostly went over the ocean and didn't affect neighboring countries.
Mongolia's 2011 census estimates a population of 2,754,685. It seems like a big piece of real-estate for such a small popualtion. Many sources say it has one of the lowest ratios of people per square km in the world.Rheinmetall said:
http://geography.about.com/od/lists/a/leastdense.htm
http://www.aneki.com/sparsely.html
The mountainous regions might prevent radiation from spreading to some extent as well.
Every country has a big history and heritage, who is to say which is more important. I was only going by potential human loss, I have nothing against Mongolia.
I love the way you start off as a good willed citizen then you go on saying it would be ok to kill of millions of people because they would want it? Really? At least say it's cause you hate dem darn strangers arrggg. And not because it would be a mercy killing. Not that I am supporting any kind of mass murder I'm just curious to know which country people want gone and whyVuljatar said:
I'd nuke India, because of the massive increase of the population that just continues to grow. And I know, China also has this problem, but they have a one child limit. India will in a couple of years be the country with the largest population in the world, destroying Mother Earth quicker than ever, and then you'll all be sorry we didn't erase a billion innocent people.
Does anyone have a truly accurate, non-political account of how people live in N.Korea. I doubt any who can comment here have actually been/lived there, and the information that does get across their border is spotty at best. After actually seeing how Cubans live day to day with my own eyes, I can say many of claims regarding conditions in Cuba are wildly exaggerated/politically motivated. Things there aren't good, but they aren't bad either.Vuljatar said:
Metalhandkerchief said:7 pages, and noone wants to bomb Norway... "Operation Lutefisk" has been a major success! Anyway...
I don't want to bomb anything.
But if I really had to, it would be America. I'm sick of all the arrogant shit they do and say, how they rename things that doesn't fit into their backwards (lack of) culture (see: football <-- Americans call this "soccer", and named their own sport, armpit-egg, "football")
Also, they really need to stop using that dumb imperial measuring system.
I agree with you to some extent, the Americans have this silly way of being retarded things from time to time. But they aren't all dumb idiots. I mean, they invented the doorbell. That's something, huh?
I'm not actually sure, so lemme use this this method in order to simplify things...
We take the worst plot of land in the world and place all the worst PEOPLE in it under the guise of a worldwide thought experiment, to see how long they can stand each other as their own country. Then, about half an hour into the experiment, blow it up!
We take the worst plot of land in the world and place all the worst PEOPLE in it under the guise of a worldwide thought experiment, to see how long they can stand each other as their own country. Then, about half an hour into the experiment, blow it up!
This, entirely.Redlin5 said:
Except for the whales part...
If I had to?
*Googles world's smallest country*
Hmm... the Vatican or Monaco.
That is truly a tough one.
On the one hand, we have a city within a city; if the Vatican was nuked then the fallout and blast would probably damage a lot of Rome. Therefore, the civilians in danger would be far more numerous.
On the plus side, the Vatican is a warped throne of religious hypocrisy, and I despise it greatly. I would love to see it die.
However Monaco would have far less civilian casualties due to it's tiny 32,000 populace, however it is over 3 times as large as Vatican City, meaning more land would be rendered damaged by the nuclear blast.
Well, it doesn't seem so hard a decision after all. I guess I'd just have to warn the Romans to get the fuck out, and then erase that hideous golden stain from an otherwise beautiful city.
Yes of course I know that you don't want Mongolia to be nuked. lol It was a most unfortunate topic anyway. I only answered to you because you put Mongolia next to Greenland.Higgs303 said:
