Fidel Castro returns from seclusion to warn of nuclear war in Middle East

brainfeeder
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
May 29, 2002
Messages
5,179
Best answers
0
Location
Florida
Old News being repeated over and over again...
 
Active Member
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Mar 13, 2005
Messages
3,877
Best answers
0
World War 3 is going to be the end of the world I think. No matter how much everyone wants to throw it to the side, if this keeps up I think this will turn into World War 3. Nuclear Warfare will probably be the end of the world.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Oct 4, 2004
Messages
1,572
Best answers
0
Location
Norge
On one side, one might think that this is Castro flicking off the US, but on the other, isn't he right?
 
King of the Hello Kitty Fanclub
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Sep 6, 2004
Messages
1,675
Best answers
0
Location
Australia
"To do this on the basis of a calculation that the Iranians are going to come running out to ask the Yankees for forgiveness is absurd," Castro said. "They [the US] will encounter a terrible resistance that will spread the conflict that cannot end up any other way than turning nuclear."
Have to agree with this.

I however, don't agree that it'll turn nuclear and be the downfall of the world. Every country knows the ramifications of launching a nuclear strike against another nation. It's not like the bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki where nobody else had nukes, if you're Israel, Pakistan or India (or any nuclear-armed country for that matter) and you launch a nuclear weapon, expect that one will be fired on you very soon and that'll probably be the end of you. Nobody wants that.

Ironically, the best protection from nuclear weapons is having nuclear weapons.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Oct 4, 2004
Messages
1,572
Best answers
0
Location
Norge
Iran is not a particularly sane nation. After the Iran-Iraq world, a lot of people there are bat**** insane; particularly surviving military. The world would not end because of a few nuclear weapons were fired. There would be severe consequences, no doubt, but there is no chance EVERYONE will fire. If Israel fires, odds are Iran wil retaliate on Israel, and on Israel alone (they don't want to piss off the US unless it's absolutely necessary), same goes for most countries in a similar situation.

I don't think there's much merit to the "if someone fires, everybody loses their **** and kills the world" theory. If anything, it will lead to a world with fewer nuclear weapons as a result of the catastrophic pollution and death that followed.
 
Force Pit Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2007
Messages
994
Best answers
0
Why can't we just fight with swords, bows and arrows anymore...
 
ANBU
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
3,192
Best answers
0
Location
Bucharest
Ironically, the best protection from nuclear weapons is having nuclear weapons.
True. Or unless some force field is invented in the near future.

I don't think there's much merit to the "if someone fires, everybody loses their **** and kills the world" theory. If anything, it will lead to a world with fewer nuclear weapons as a result of the catastrophic pollution and death that followed.
I'm not so sure about that. I believe that whoever drops the first nuclear warhead starts the war.

As for Fidel Castro, i tend to believe him on this one.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Oct 4, 2004
Messages
1,572
Best answers
0
Location
Norge
Why in the world would EVERYBODY be stupid because one or two nations are? You underestimate humanity's penchant for survival.
 
Active Member
✔️ HL Verified
🚂 Steam Linked
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Sep 23, 2002
Messages
1,876
Best answers
0
Location
Fryslân Boppe! The Netherlands
Why in the world would EVERYBODY be stupid because one or two nations are? You underestimate humanity's penchant for survival.
That pretty much.
Nuclear weapons are detergent. Nothing more, nothing less. Chances of them ever being used by a non-religious government are close to non.
Independent terrorist groups are another story though.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Oct 4, 2004
Messages
1,572
Best answers
0
Location
Norge
The only way to win a nuclear war is to not be in one.
 
Active Member
✔️ HL Verified
🚂 Steam Linked
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Sep 23, 2002
Messages
1,876
Best answers
0
Location
Fryslân Boppe! The Netherlands
On a side note, with china, russia, europe and the states being chums now. Who would we fight a third world war with?

I mean, no other country is advanced or big enough to do ****, right?
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Oct 4, 2004
Messages
1,572
Best answers
0
Location
Norge
There is no way in Hell the US would retaliate if Israel started a nuclear war with Iran. That would be political suicide.
 
brainfeeder
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
May 29, 2002
Messages
5,179
Best answers
0
Location
Florida
Since the 1950s... it's been... ZOMG THERE GON' BE A NUCLEAR WAR OVER THERE... AND OH **** THERE GON' BE A NUCLEAR WAR OVA THUR... AND GOTDAMN THEY'LL BE A NUCLEAR WAR OVERRR HERE!!
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Oct 4, 2004
Messages
1,572
Best answers
0
Location
Norge
I'd salute you, but I'm not in the Obvious Corps.
 
The Brain Freezer
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Sep 9, 2007
Messages
1,374
Best answers
0
Location
PT Porto
Sure we will have a 3th world war because the world is having economic problems. Everytime there is economic problems in huge scale there is a huge war. We have to destroy so we can build later or else money does not run. Unfortunatly when we reallise that we can't eat money, it will be to late.
 
Force Pit Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2007
Messages
994
Best answers
0
Sure we will have a 3th world war because the world is having economic problems. Everytime there is economic problems in huge scale there is a huge war. We have to destroy so we can build later or else money does not run. Unfortunatly when we reallise that we can't eat money, it will be to late.
I am with you on this
 
King of the Hello Kitty Fanclub
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Sep 6, 2004
Messages
1,675
Best answers
0
Location
Australia
That pretty much.
Nuclear weapons are detergent. Nothing more, nothing less. Chances of them ever being used by a non-religious government are close to non.
Independent terrorist groups are another story though.
Sorry, I know this is a language thing, but I laughed so much when I read that, I think you mean deterrent, detergent is something like soap that you use to clean things with which, one could argue, something a nuclear weapon could do.

On the actual subject, if one country were to fire a nuke, another country would mostly retaliate on that country with another nuke. Israel isn't just gonna start firing off nukes for the hell of it, it'll be (if at all - I consider unlikely due to the ramifications of firing a nuclear missile) in retaliation to something another country does. From there, who knows what will happen, depending on the circumstances, you can't say USA won't defend Israel, from there the other Arab nations will probably join forces to fight USA, USA calls in its allies from Europe/Asia and it's world war.

All that said, I don't think any of this will happen. Nuclear war and the end of the world has been predicted since the first bomb was dropped. There's a reason USA and USSR never fired on each other, simply because they knew the other country would fire back. In today's day and age with early warning missile detection, you can believe that the country you fire upon will have fired back before your bomb hits.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom