congratulations to korea

ROFMFAO

WTF does it involve the gameplay community that Korea has nukes anyway, It has 0 use here.
If 1 nation fires 1 nuke, then say bye bye to the rest of the world, because it will have a worldwide impact.
I suggest delete this topic, since it has entirle nothing to do with LR or on this game anyway
Who cares wich nation has potential nukes, btw imo all great nations will have such devices anyway, hidden or open.

Regards

But Knife,
That's M.A.D. Mutual Assured Destruction
I understand your point - level field - but the answer lies (hopefully someday) elswhere, as nukes do much worse than just destroy any given target. Naive to assume we'll ever see such resolution in our lives, they shud never have been used...

Well stated, I understand - let's hope for the best - I'm gonna see who's on Guild

yes nukes have been used before and you see what it has come of it.
Nagasaki and Hiroshima still suffer from that on radiation and previous fallout.
And besides proby every great nation has somewhere hidden or not already an arsenal of nukes, but they wont use it because it would kill themselves.
Respect however CANT be brought by fear on using the most devistating weaponry on this planet.
It even can have a opposite reaction ( a rat corned, will attack you if she doesnt find a way to escape)
Besides its in the nature of the human race that we bring wars, its our part of exitings, part of nature itself.
(concquer/kill the weak in order that the strong servive)
dream on on having a warfree world lmao, thats just a fairytale and will get to our doom to.

regards

Everything is organized into hierachies, someone allways takes the lead, maybe not entirely....some of the leadership may be shared but the struggle for power (aka freedom) lies at the core of man and nature, and when the existing powerstruggle is challenged we have disagreements.
What im trying to say is that the world nations have never been on equal footing, if a country is stronger it has more "push" and will get more of its agenda realized. This rule is true in all things even down to micro-relations between humans, in families or groups of friends and especially in buisniss.
When two people disagree and they cant work it out, one of them can choose to take it to a higher authority and the matter will be taken out of their hands and settled for them (Courts).
When Nations have dissagrements it can be taken up in the UN or other International organisations, but these have limited "Push" cause they all have to agree on which action to take, and some of the members dont want nobody in their buisness so they will opt for the UN to stay out of other nations buisness too
Now we have an unsettled dissagrement, international organisations will try to push the counterparts with tradesanctions and such, but these generally dont work very well....
SO now were at a standoff since all talks have failed.
At this point inter-dependencies come into play, the old monarchs knew this, thats why they married off all their daughters n sons in to other royal families, youre gonna think twice before attacking your wifes family right?
In these times the inter-dependencies are financial, for example china and Saudi arabia own a big chunk of the US and at the same time China and Saudi Arabia sells most of their products in the US, so these guys will probably never attack each other, the same thing is true for the european union who is tiying itsellf together with trade, but what if there is no dependencies?
When this situation arises the possibility of war arises, and this decision falls on the political leadership. So case and point...its allways dangerous to challenge existing powerstructures if there is no interdependency, but.....if the step into nuclear capability is made, there is the possibilty of more safety from foreign influence....is this good for North Korea? probably not for the people starving, for the leadership? sure they can stay in power and run the country into the ground while flying first class, dictators allmost allways do this. im not saying invasion of NK is a good idea, but do you want to celebrate a non elected dictators step into nuclear capability? hmmm, i reckon not.

One step closer to armaggeddon

Quote from "MentalChaos"

I'm pretty sure, they were atomic bombs

Hey but since I enjoy the topic of destruction, here we go. . .

There are two major types of bombs,

A Atomic Bomb

A Hydrogen Bomb

Atomic bombs
operate by splitting large atomic nuclei (fission) such as uranium or more usually plutonium, this releases quite a lot of energy. There is however a limited size you can make this as the bomb tends to blow itself apart before it has all ignited.

Hydrogen bombs
use an atomic bomb to ignite a nuclear fusion bomb - this is fusing hydrogen isotopes together to form helium. This releases a lot more energy, especially as the neutrons released by the fusion part of the bomb makes the fission part more efficient.

other then that, . . . its off topic whats next?

The atomic bomb brings radiation and devastation. . . perhaps the Atomic BONG! :shock: that could bring smiles and celebration and everyone would be happy!

IS COOL MON~!!

NEXT TOPIC-------------------->
iM oUT pEACE mon GRrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr cyA

Display More

cant remember the name of the bomb,electro magnetic pulse [emp] it leaves everything intact buildings. but if its electrical computers etc,unless u wear pacemaker or difibulator your deadmeat

That was the neutron bomb, that Carter was looking at in his day.

Quote

A neutron bomb, technically referred to as an enhanced radiation weapon (ERW), is a type of tactical nuclear weapon formerly built mainly by the United States specifically to release a large portion of its energy as energetic neutron radiation. This contrasts with standard thermonuclear weapons, which are designed to capture this intense neutron radiation to increase its overall explosive yield. In terms of yield, ERWs typically produce about one-tenth that of most fission-type atomic weapons.[1] Even with their significantly lower explosive power, ERWs are still capable of much greater destruction than any conventional bomb. Meanwhile, relative to other nuclear weapons, damage is more focused on biological material than on material infrastructure (though extreme blast and heat effects are not eliminated—see Technical overview below).

Quote

Conception of the neutron bomb is generally credited to Samuel Cohen of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, who developed the concept in 1958. Although initially opposed by President John F. Kennedy[citation needed], its testing was authorized and carried out in 1963 at an underground Nevada test facility.[2] Development was subsequently postponed by President Jimmy Carter in 1978 following protests against his administration's plans to deploy neutron warheads in Europe. President Ronald Reagan restarted production in 1981.[3]

i read it in a magazine a few years [neutron bomb] just couldnt remember the name.as past previous presidents administrations countless weapons research and development from the b58 hustler which started production in 1956 was the fastest and highly equipped[weapons],however it never saw service obviously it was scrapped,as countless.to the evermore popular star wars program which was conceived during reagan admin.was also scrapped after his term or terms were up,basicly a high powered laser which could destroy or jam guidance system in various missle's,there one misssle which flies low altitude missle it self doesnt much damage,but what's inside that does,its called steel rain ,whithin the missle contains 100-250 grenades when missle reaches it's trajectory/coordinates it explodes and releases all those grenades,hence the name [ steel rain ] the amount of grenades depends on the size of the missle.personally i dont see anything comming from the current president administration.