PolishForums   Republic of Poland Online
Home . Polls . Search Witamy,  [Guest 38.103.63.16]  Latest Discussions . Unanswered Posts
 Please register or login below:

 » Username  » Password 
Polish Forums / Polish Politics & History /

A nuclear war or a biological war - which is more likely?


posts: 17
 
Ranj
Edited by: Ranj  Jan 26, 08, 04:01  #1

A nuclear war or a biological war? I was just watching a documentary on A&E, which got me to think about it. A nuclear war would pretty much mean the end to everyone, imo....if one country pushes the "button", then another one will. Armegeddon would have arrived. But if it's just about taking out a certain people or country, then biological is going to be the answer.

I wonder how likely this will happen on a large scale? Personally, I don't think it's that far away.

What are other's thoughts on this subject?


Member
Posts: 1484
Joined: Sep 29, 06
                              
 
Grzegorz_
  Jan 26, 08, 04:11  #2

Nuclear...


Member
Posts: 4893
Joined: Nov 16, 06
                              
 
Ranj
  Jan 26, 08, 04:13  #3

Grzegorz_ wrote:
Nuclear...

Why do you think that, G? What makes you come to that conclusion?


Member
Posts: 1484
Joined: Sep 29, 06
                              
 
Bartolome
  Jan 26, 08, 05:27  #4

With the unrest in Pakistan, Iranian aspirations (they can't be trusted imho) and Russia still being in limbo everything can happen.


Member
Posts: 1029
Joined: Sep 14, 06
                              
 
Ranj
  Jan 26, 08, 05:43  #5

Bartolome wrote:
With the unrest in Pakistan, Iranian aspirations (they can't be trusted imho) and Russia still being in limbo everything can happen.

But what kind of weapon would be used, in your opinion? Do you truly believe they want the end of mankind?


Member
Posts: 1484
Joined: Sep 29, 06
                              
 
Bartolome
  Jan 26, 08, 06:24  #6

Since from the countries regarded as 'Muslim' only Pakistan currently has got an A-bomb, using this kind of weapon against anybody would be possible after seizure of power by radicals there.
Ranj wrote:
Do you truly believe they want the end of mankind?

Not mankind, the West.


Member
Posts: 1029
Joined: Sep 14, 06
                              
 
hairball
  Jan 26, 08, 11:18  #7

Technically IMHO "nuclear weapons" have already been used in Iraq. We've made them sound weak by calling them "depleted", but they are sill radioactive and many have already become sick and died from radiation related sicknesses.


Member
Posts: 411
Joined: Dec 16, 07
                              
 
isthatu
  Jan 26, 08, 14:15  #8

Ranj wrote:
But what kind of weapon would be used, in your opinion? Do you truly believe they want the end of mankind?

Probably one of those shady ,US developed bio warfare agents that are targeted at specific ethno gene traits.....


Member
Posts: 1704
Joined: Jun 8, 07
                              
 
Ranj
  Jan 26, 08, 14:38  #9

hairball wrote:
"nuclear weapons" have already been used in Iraq. We've made them sound weak by calling them "depleted", but they are sill radioactive and many have already become sick and died from radiation related sicknesses.

Can you show me sth that proves this? I'm truly interested:).


Member
Posts: 1484
Joined: Sep 29, 06
                              
 
isthatu
  Jan 26, 08, 14:45  #10

he's just whittering on about DU shells again........dont get him started.


Member
Posts: 1704
Joined: Jun 8, 07
                              
 
celinski
  Jan 26, 08, 14:46  #11

isthatu wrote:
dont get him started.


Lets all go to paintballs, each country gets a color. Don't laugh ever get hit by one. lol


Member
Posts: 1736
Joined: Nov 14, 07
                              
 
BubbaWoo
  Jan 26, 08, 14:53  #12

ooh... now that sounds fun

Member
Posts: 4941
Joined: Sep 26, 06
                              
 
hairball
Edited by: hairball  Jan 27, 08, 07:31  #13

Ranj wrote:
I'm truly interested


Of cource isthatu once heard some US General who was standing outside the Pentagon saying Depleted Uranium weapons are "completly safe" and then johnp backed him up, so that must mean they are!

What they say to you is that these "weapons" are as "radio active" as your "granfathers watch". What they don't say to you is that when these "nuclear waste bullets" hit there targets. They are vapourised into tiny microscopic radioactive dust particles, that are so small, they can even penetrate the filter on gas masks. And it only takes on of these particles to kill you!

Edit

It has been estimated that one millionth of a gram accumulation in a person's body would be fatal.

URL

What Dr. Doug Rokke, the former director of the U.S. Army's Depleted Uranium Project, has to say on the whole thing is very interesting. Google him, see what you get.

And you might find this helpful

URL


Member
Posts: 411
Joined: Dec 16, 07
                              
 
isthatu
  Jan 27, 08, 11:55  #14

hairball wrote:
Of cource isthatu once heard some US General who was standing outside the Pentagon saying Depleted Uranium weapons are "completly safe"

tosser,Ive never been to the states,how could I have heard this.......
Besides,so frikkin what.you start a war with the intention of winning it,they are hardly going to use depleted jelly baby shells are they....time to take a walk in the real world hairball.the world that has been safe for you to live in and speak freely in because a few peolpe with balls have gone out and done the nasty stuff that you are far to high and mighty to do yourself.


Member
Posts: 1704
Joined: Jun 8, 07
                              
 
hairball
  Jan 28, 08, 06:44  #15

So you think what they have done to Iraq is good? They've made a toxic waste land and the eventual death toll will be very high. Iraqi women who give birth don't ask if it's a boy or a girl. They ask "Is it normal?" Meaning: are its vital organs on the inside: does it only have one head: does it have a head: Maybe in your eyes that's acceptable, but not in mine. This "war" was started because Saddam suposidly had "Weapons of Mass Distruction." So your acceptible answer is "Let's drop 1500 tons of nuclear waste on them! It saves on disposal!"

Prat


Member
Posts: 411
Joined: Dec 16, 07
                              
 
joepilsudski
Edited by: joepilsudski  Jan 28, 08, 15:34  #16

A nuclear war or a biological war?

Biological warfare would kill more people, and there would be less mess for the 'elites' to clean up afterward, at least in terms of property damage...Nuclear warfare is undesirable for even the most cold-blooded 'elitists' except for the fanatics in Israel.

Member
Posts: 631
Joined: Apr 27, 07
                              
 
hairball
  Feb 1, 08, 07:37  #17

Ranj

This is Dr Helen Caldicott who's head of the Nuclear Polacy Resaerch Institute talking pecificly about Depleted Uranium. it's only a 4 miniute film but worth listening to what she say's. especialy about Iraq.

video


Member
Posts: 411
Joined: Dec 16, 07
                              
 
Similar Threads¦Latest Discussions Go UPtop of page

Home / Polish Politics & History /


Only registered and logged-in users may post here. Please login or register.

Newer thread in this forum: Older thread in this forum:
Poland Betrayed in WW2 Unusual soldier (The bear - named Voytek)

93 users online in the last hour [Guests - 67 / Members - 26] All times are CST (GMT -6)

Home . Latest Discussions . Unanswered Posts . Statistics
© 2005-08 PolishForums.com | About Us | Contact Us | Privacy, TOS, Rules | Poland Advertising | Support PF